Dr N Janbemo Humtsoe
Wokha
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling that granted the Centre three months to complete the delimitation exercise in Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, and Nagaland, the issue of delimitation in Nagaland has once again come to the forefront. While states such as Assam have completed the process on August 2023, Nagaland remains in a state of delay due to administrative impediments and contentious political debates. The issue of delimitation has been contentious, with political, social, and demographic factors influencing the debate. While the process aims to achieve electoral balance, it also raises concerns about political representation, tribal interest and discriminations.
The last delimitation exercise was conducted in 1973, resulting in the delimitation of the state into 60 Assembly constituencies, with 20 each allocated to Kohima, Mokokchung, and Tuensang districts. Simultaneously, four new districts, namely Phek, Zunheboto, Wokha, and Mon, were created in the same year, expanding the total number of districts from three to seven. Fifty years later, the total number of districts has increased to 17, resulting in significant realignment in the state. Yet the people of the state are still represented according to the census of 1971.
As per the Chief Minister’s response on the floor of the house in August 2024, the delimitation exercise for the four North-Eastern States of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and Manipur was deferred by the Government of India through a notification issued on February 20, 2008. However, this order was rescinded through a presidential order on February 28, 2020. Subsequently, the Union Government reconstituted the Delimitation Commission for these States on March 6, 2020. Nevertheless, via a notification dated March 3, 2023, the delimitation exercise for these Northeast States was removed from the purview of the Delimitation Commission.
For decades, Nagaland has been sidelined when it comes to revising electoral constituencies. While Assam completed its delimitation in August 2023, the absence of similar action in Nagaland indicates a selective approach that disadvantages the state and marginalized some communities. Thisdisparity in political representation not only undermines the democratic process but also creates a sense of political alienation among certain sections of the state. Hence, conducting the delimitation exercise without delay, in a transparent manner, is crucial to ensure fair representation and rectify historical imbalances.
The delimitation process is designed to ensure that electoral constituencies reflect demographic changes and uphold the principle of fair representation. The 2020 presidential order has already eliminated any legal impediments that had previously hindered Nagaland and other northeastern states from undertaking this process. By postponing delimitation, Nagas continues to be governed by outdated political alignments based on a very old census that no longer accurately reflects the realities of the present generation. The landscape has undergone significant transformations since 1971. Therefore, fresh realignments that reflect population shifts, urbanization, and other demographic changes would lead to a more accurate representation in legislative bodies. Moreover, the delimitation exercise would uphold the fundamental right to equality as guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Nagaland, despite its small size, consists of 17 districts and is home to 17 distinct ethnic communities. Hence, it is inevitable that there will be divergent viewpoints on the matter of delimitation. However, these internal disagreements underscore the need for an independent and transparent delimitation process, free from partisan influence. The state cannot permit mere differences in opinion to impede an exercise that is mandated by the Constitution of the country. There have been instances where reforms, such as women’s reservations in municipal bodies or oil exploration, have been stalled due to excuses like the ongoing Naga political negotiations and Article 371(A).
Nevertheless, the state was compelled to conduct municipal elections with women’s reservation, albeit with a significant delay, as per the provisions of the constitution. Therefore, it would be illogical to assume that delimitation should not take place just because we might have some unresolved issues.
The Election Commission of India maintained that specific directions from the Central government were required to begin delimitation under Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Given that Assam’s delimitation was executed without similar delay, it is imperative that the same yardstick be applied to Nagaland. Delaying the process will not only contravenes the Supreme Court’s directive but also prolongs the period during which Nagaland’s electorate remains subjugated by outdated census and boundaries.
It is crucial to note that delimitation exercises serve as a mechanism for improving governance. Delimitation is more than just redrawing electoral maps, it directly impacts governance, resource allocation, and the balance of political power. Therefore, ensuring equitable and fair representation is important to addressand rectify various political and economic disparities. Underrepresentation frequently results in unequal resource distribution. When resources are allocated and distributed based on the number of representatives or interests of the dominant groups, marginalized communities are left with fewer resources and opportunities for growth. Consequently, historical injustices may persist as policies fail to break the cycles of poverty and discrimination, thereby hindering the progress of marginalized groups in improving their socio-economic status.
One of the main challenges of the delimitation process will be the evolving demographic dynamics of the rural-urban population. It is noteworthy that, in the 1950s, the urban population constituted less than 2 percent of the total population. Even in 1971, the urban population in Nagaland was less than 10 percent. However, in recent times, due to rapid rural-urban migration and the influx of non-Nagas, the urban population has experienced a substantial increase, particularly in and around Dimapur. Therefore, addressing such demographic shifts necessitates careful consideration. Hence, in areas with a significant non-indigenous population, delimitation should incorporate socio-economic factors and cultural considerations in addition to the population data. Such blended approach would ensure that vast rural regions receive adequate representation, even if their population density is lower compared to urban areas.
Delimitation in Nagaland is both a legal obligation and a democratic necessity. The tireless advocacy of groups like the Delimitation Demand Committee highlights the urgency of this issue. With the Supreme Court’s ruling providing a clear deadline, it is now up to the government to act decisively.Fair political representation is a cornerstone of democracy. By conducting delimitation without further delay, Nagaland can correct historical imbalances, empower marginalized communities, enhance political participation and strengthen its democratic foundations.
