ASTD, DAYO defend Jamir's right to speak on Naga political issue
Dimapur, September 20 (MExN): The Ao Senso Telongjem Dimapur (ASTD) and Dimapur Ao Youth Organisation (DAYO) have criticised recent remarks attributed to NSCN (I-M) leaders V S Atem and R H Raising against veteran Naga leader and former Nagaland Chief Minister Dr S C Jamir.
In a joint statement, the two organisations said they had taken serious note of the remarks, including the reported portrayal of Jamir as being "out and out Indian", the assertion that he was "not an advocate of the Naga people" and the statement that he had "no right" to speak on the Naga political issue.
ASTD and DAYO said the Naga political issue should not be reduced to a contest over who had the exclusive authority to speak on it, stating, “a Naga's right to speak cannot be dictated by an organisation.”
The organisations said Jamir was a Naga from a native village who, during his political career, was elected and given a mandate by the people of his constituency. He served as a Parliamentary Secretary at the Centre, Chief Minister of Nagaland and subsequently as Governor of several Indian states, they said.
"His political record, like that of any public figure, may be debated, criticised or challenged. However, disagreement with his political position cannot, by itself, deprive him of his fundamental right to express his views on matters concerning his people and his State," the organisations said.
They said if the NSCN (I-M) or any other political organisation disagreed with Jamir's interpretation of Naga history or his approach towards a political settlement, the disagreement should be addressed through facts, historical evidence, reasoned arguments and public discourse.
The organisations questioned who had the authority to decide which Naga was sufficiently "Naga" to speak about the Naga people and whether such authority rested with an individual, organisation, political group, leadership or negotiating body.
ASTD and DAYO said the Naga political journey had involved generations of people, including political leaders, civil society organisations, churches, intellectuals, elected representatives, national workers and ordinary citizens.
They said no organisation should assume the authority to determine who could or could not speak for Nagas.
The organisations acknowledged that contrasting political convictions existed among Nagas regarding the relationship between the Naga people and the Union of India, and said such differences were legitimate subjects of political debate.
However, they said reducing a person's legitimacy as a Naga to whether his or her political position conformed to a particular ideology was neither constructive nor conducive to reconciliation.
ASTD and DAYO also objected to framing the debate around being "Indian" or "Naga", saying political differences should not become a test of a person's Naga identity.
They said there was a distinction between stating that Jamir did not represent an organisation's negotiating position and saying that he had "no right to speak", with the former being a political position and the latter concerning participation in public discourse.
The organisations called for greater restraint and responsibility in public discourse on the Naga political issue, saying the decades-long conflict, divisions, competing political positions and prolonged negotiations required a more mature and inclusive approach.
They urged Naga political groups and public leaders to exercise restraint and dignity in their public statements, saying personal attacks, questions of identity and assertions of exclusive mandate could deepen fragmentation.
"Dr. S.C. Jamir's views may be accepted, rejected or critically examined by the Naga public. That decision belongs to the people," they said.
ASTD and DAYO urged all concerned to maintain dignity in public discourse and said the Naga people were capable of listening, questioning, examining and deciding for themselves.
