The Naga Students' Federation (NSF) clarification, albeit belatedly, regarding its ultimatum on Staff Selection Board (SSB) hopefully would quell the ensuing controversy and steer it towards the real issue – the need for transparency and accountability of recruitment in public employment.
The demand should “not cast any apprehension” and “the motive is only to ensure that every educated youth of Nagaland gets equal job opportunity in matters of public employment as per law,” the Federation stated.
The controversy, to repeat, was generated by appending of signatures by “some federating units outside the present State of Nagaland.” The appendance, however, does not imply that “they will benefit anything or get job opportunity under the exams conducted by the SSB,” but done only in solidarity, the NSF categorically implied in its clarification.
The recent controversy is curious. No such reactions were observed when more or less similar strategies were adopted in the past, particularly in 2019.
To refresh, the demand setting up SSB is not new. The issue was first put into limelight by the Public Service Aspirants of Nagaland (PSAN), formed in 2016, to “fight against corruption in the state services recruitment process.” It termed SSB/SSC as the “need of the hour” in Nagaland.
It first submitted a representation to the then Nagaland Governor PB Acharya on December 16, 2016, demanding for SSB in line with Central Staff Selection Committee (SSC). It was followed by another to the then Chief Minister Dr Shürhozulie Liezietsu on June 27, 2017, and later on November 17 to TR Zeliang.
When the present People’s Democratic Alliance assumed power, another representation was made to the Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio on June 2, 2018 according to PSAN. The Chief Minister thereafter asked the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms on July 19 to "examine the demand seriously” and “necessary action be kindly intimated back to CM's office,” it said.
However, no progress was made, and nearly after a year, the NSF new team on June 11, 2019, took up the mantle and asked the Government to set up SSB within two months.
When the deadline lapsed on August 12 without any positive overture, it served another one-month ultimatum to the Government on August 21. The demands include - notification banning all recruitment to ‘Group C’ posts until the implementation of SSB in the state; notification for scrapping down of all departmental exams for recruitment to ‘Group C’ posts; and setting up of SSB and filling all existing vacancies through open recruitment.
Without any action from the Government, the NSF on October 30, 2019, launched its first phase of indefinite democratic agitation with students of various schools, colleges and universities wearing black band/badge along with the uniform of their respective institutions.
It kept in “abeyance” the agitation following an official statement issued by the State Government on November 7 stating that, “The Government is actively pursuing the matter." A cabinet meeting held on October 18, 2019 also decided to constitute a committee further examine in “detail the modalities,” it was informed.
The latest NSF’s 15-day ultimatum on February 22 indicated that the committee has already forwarded the policy, but the Government is yet to act on it. The apprehension over technicalities had given it some breathers.
While the confusion over the technicality of signatures is justified, and hence, clarified; any other issues regarding the same do not seem logical. For instance, while SSB would ensure most vacancies outside the preview of Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC) are routed through the Board, it would not impact the existing reservation policy of the State Government.
Several other organisations in the past have also raised the issue of “backdoor” or “irregular appointments” in Nagaland. The Government placated by issuing periodic “Office Memorandum” prohibiting such practices. But the problem persists.
Such arbitrary practices, apart from facilitating nepotism, favouritism and abuse of power, most importantly, deprive the constitutional guarantee of equal opportunity “to all eligible candidates to apply and seek public employment.” An SSC or a similar mechanism is the way forward and dawdling would only exacerbate this governance ailment.
In doing so, a level playing field would be ensured to all applicants, instead of alleged patronage and political or bureaucratic interference.
