Aheli Moitra
If one wants to make sense of the current imbroglio unfolding before the slated elections to the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in Nagaland State, the best place to go would be the editorials of the Nagaland Page (www.nagalandpage.com), a daily newspaper published from Dimapur. The newspaper has set the issue in its proper context, particularly with regards to the rights of Naga women and equality, or the lack thereof, in Naga society. It has also constructively laid out what has gone wrong with the Naga polity, particularly the unholy alliance of the “tribal non governmental bodies” and the Nagaland State Government, and the pitfalls therein, from a feminist lens.
Very few women, like the Editor of Nagaland Page, have chosen to be part of the discussion on the ULB polls. When they have, though, they have constructed their arguments through research and analysis of information and knowledge drawn from the ground—not only from the past ‘time immemorial’ but also from our location in the present as well as the future.
The counter argument to such well informed analysis has, however, mostly been ‘men are men and women are women’ (as a Morung colleague summarized quite well). It will be unfruitful to comment on these without a proper study into the Naga male psyche and the continued equation of politics to warfare, or even a hunting exercise.
In any case, two important perspectives have stood out that could help synthesize a way forward. One is from a Senior Additional Advocate General of Nagaland and another from a retired bureaucrat turned anti-corruption activist. The former has brought the pertinent constitutional observation that Article 371-A, and anything guaranteed therein, does not supersede basic constitutional guarantees, like fundamental rights (Equality, for instance, is both a fundamental and universal human right and should not/cannot be superseded by customary law whether the Nagas are part of the Indian Union or an otherwise sovereign nationstate). The latter has made the case of women’s ‘status’ and rights to be first amended in the customary laws of the Nagas through a ‘Supreme Customary Law Court.’
It is possible to critically examine these arguments, and design a way forward, before drawing a personal position on the matter because they are well informed and reflective opinions. On the other hand, neither the civil bodies nor the State Government have been able to go beyond stubborn upholding of positions by framing, and giving body to, the issues involved in the debate.
We have seen a glimpse of the civil society worry: that the current Nagaland Municipal Act of 2001 has a taxation component that seeks to colonise the Naga people further through extensive governance. We have also understood a little of why it is important to hold elections to draw funds necessary to develop Nagaland’s rotting urban sector. But neither of these positions has been articulated well nor an informed public debate initiated. Instead, the women’s reservation issue has been made the “battleground, not the battle prize,” as an editorial in the Nagaland Page noted, and arm twisting methods have been used to force candidates to adhere.
Use of force does not bode well for an already fractured civil society (one reason why the issue has reached such proportion), nor does it work for the political parties that are leaving candidates with the ‘option’ of choosing between their community and a political party. The whole affair has now boiled down to a clash between allies and the people, and it can only result in disaster. No matter who wins this battle, the war will be lost.
One thing is clear, Naga leaders need to include women as an entrenched part of intra and inter community meetings who will equally contribute to the debate—the male dominated institutions have to make a deliberate shift from their ‘status’ preoccupied positions to one of humanity. If Naga apex bodies are serious about their future as an evolving people, they cannot shed their responsibility towards creating a well informed equal society.
