Some of those who voted YES had this to say:
• Yes. The Center can declare Disturbed Area only on the recommendation of the State government. In the mid-90s while SC Jamir was the Chief Minister, it was his government that recommended the Center to declare Disturbed Area in Nagaland. The only way to lift the Disturbed Area from our state is for the state government to convince the Center that it should be lifted. But I think our state government is too scared to say anything since they only go to their political masters with begging bowl.
• Yes absolutely. There's no reason AFSPA should still prevail in Nagaland.
• Yes, the Nagaland government must take a firm stand on AFSPA. Just passing resolutions and then keeping quiet will not do. If the government is serious about its resolution to ask the Center to lift the DAA, it must go to Delhi and show its displeasure and firmly stand for lifting of the Act. Just shouting from Kohima will not do.
• Yes. its inhumane and a draconian law bypassing the natural right to 'Live'.
• Yes, just passing resolutions will not do. The State government must take a clear action in this matter.
• Yes high time. Govt too should give pressure to the Centre.
Yes. Its time the govt. should realize that AFSPA is just a tool that hampers the development and prosperity of the youths in our state.
• Yes. why not, AFSPA makes Indian security force a superhand upon civilian it's target both rebellion and civilian in the region. In term of governing military rule is being enforce in parallel to democratic government. State govt. is empowered to maintain law and order with state machinery. But due to male function and corruption the state govt. remained dependent totally on the centre, militarism tarnished and paralised the democracy. Every problem has a solution but AFSPA is not even the good alternative solution to maintain peace and tranquility in the state. The state govt. can do to maintain peace and prosperity as much as the Center can does.
• Yes. no reason to keep the force
Some of those who voted NO had this to say:
• Ayaleh, lets not compare Nagaland to Tripura government. We all know that the Tripura government against all odds is one of the most efficient governments. They have a Chief Minister who has been there for four terms and is the least corrupt and one of the poorest CMs. But our ministers in Nagaland, you know how filthy rich they are. Their interest is not the people, but themselves. So lets be realistic. Our state government cannot stand up to the Central government.
Some of those who voted OTHERS had this to say:
• I do not think the State Government has such powers in Nagaland.
• The wording of the question gives the impression that the state government has the power to withdraw the Act. This is highly misleading. The Assembly can pass resolutions seeking the withdrawal of the Act but it is the Centre's nod that makes it happen.
• Nagaland government would n't able to 2tad ...They dont have principles to run the state ..!!!
• Nagaland government.... Next to impossible.... Their mind is fund....
• what can we expect from such feeble govt. they dont run the state, they only run after public funds
• Tripura is a state where the indigenous Tripuri is being reduce to minority. Due to continuous inflow of outsiders especially from neighboring country, the indigenous community is reduce to 40% of the total population. Their revolutionary movement was to protect their land and identity; but it is an impossible task for them since they are already reduced to minority. Many are surrendered and most of them had become moderates. So, the situation feels better and peace. In case of Nagaland and other naga areas, still the movement is active and many factions seems to be in sensitive situation where anarchy system may arise. Due to ceasefire, situation is somehow in moderate system. It is up to the sensitive with the situation and circumstances, that such law may withdraw or not to be!
