Moa Jamir
The Nagaland State Government’s approach to combat corruption, understood simply as the abuse of power for private gain, in recent years has become increasingly questionable, casting doubt on whether it is serious about ensuring transparent and accountable governance.
Two issues can be cited here. The first is the non-appointment of the Nagaland Lokayukta, leaving the anti-corruption watchdog of the State headless for over a year now. Worryingly, the State Government appears to be indulging in delay tactics to appoint a new head by introducing an amendment to the Nagaland Lokayukta Act, 2017 and extending the vacancy period for appointment of new Lokayukta from "not later than six months" to one year.
The ‘Nagaland Lokayukta Act (Second Amendment) No. 2 Bill, 2021’ seeking to ‘simplify and modify’ certain sections of Nagaland Lokayukta Act, 2017 (Act 1 of 2018) was introduced on the first day of the 8th session of the 13th Nagaland Legislative Assembly on August 3, 2021, two days before the expiry of the deadline to appoint new head. Incidentally, the Amendment Bill was passed “unanimously” by the Assembly only on November 26, 2021, during its 9th Session.
Worse still, even with the expiry of the one-year deadline, the State is yet to see a new Lokayukta and the government seems to be in no hurry to appoint one. As per Nagaland Lokayukta’s website, the previous incumbent vacated the seat on February 5, 2021. However, it is unclear whether the one-year deadline is counted from the day the amendment bill was passed. Devoid of the anti-corruption ombudsman, the latest information on Nagaland’s fight against corruption pertains to cases closed from February 23, 2019, to August 31, 2019. As provided in the Act, the Upa-Lokayukta is discharging the duties of the Lokayukta since February 2021.
The second case in point ist the constitution of the Nagaland Staff Selection Board (NSSB). Despite the notification of NSSB Regulations, 2020 in August 2020, after dilly-dallying for a long time as well as advertising for the posts of NSSB Chairman and Members as early as September 2020, it took nearly 1 year and 5 months for the State Government to partially constitute the board.
The move came after the Kohima Bench of Guwahati High Court (GHC), hearing a Public Interest Litigation on February 2, directed the Nagaland State Government’s counsel to “come with instruction on the next date (February 16) as to when the Board would be constituted.” It further cautioned that the Court would be compelled to “issue necessary order or direction for constituting the Board within a specified period of time” if the latter does not come with the ‘specific instruction.’
In both cases, the State Government’s sense of urgency is seen as an act of avoiding legal hassles, rather than a genuine commitment for change. Incidentally, both the Upa-Lokayukta and the new member of the NSSB contested the last State Assembly elections representing one of the major constituents of the present opposition-less United Democratic Alliance (UDA) Government of Nagaland.
It is the prerogative of the government of the day to appoint any eligible individual it deemed fit for an office and the credentials of the concerned appointees are not in question, however, it cannot be shielded from charges of nepotism and cronyism by resorting to such political appointments. These actions create unnecessary speculations thereby undermining public confidence in the office and casting doubt on the State Government’s commitment to combat corrupt practices.
For any comments on corruption and governance, drop a line to jamir.moa@gmail.com
