Sovereignty or within Constitution?
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: July 13 2016 -

It’s getting murkier and murkier. Ambivalence and ambiguity have attained indecipherable degrees.

Whereas the Government of India has been steadfastly asserting that the political dialogue with the NSCN-IM is within the ambit of the Constitution of India, NSCN-IM leadership has been insisting that the dialogue process is an unconditional one.

Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju had went on record stating that the NSCN-IM had given up its demand for sovereignty and the rebel outfit wants a “solution within the Constitution of India”.

But recently, NSCN-IM General Secretary Thuingaleng Muivah in an interview given to The Hindu categorically stated that they have not given up the demand for Naga sovereignty.

He stated, “…The understanding on shared sovereignty has been arrived at because the uniqueness of Naga history is recognised…” Even though the Government has not so far made any comment on the purported point of agreement which according to the NSCN-IM is shared sovereignty, the outfit’s leadership has asserted that the Government of India has agreed to the proposals/demands for separate passports and flags for Nagas.

Sharply contradicting Th Muivah’s assertion on sovereignty, one officer of the Home Ministry said that it was a blatant lie.

As published by the First Post, the officer dismissed Muivah’s claim by bluntly saying “The sovereignty issue is long dead and gone”.

Given all these contradictory and incompatible statements, the dialogue process or more precisely the Framework Agreement signed between the Government of India and NSCN-IM remains an enigma or a political riddle.

Yes, Mr Muivah was talking about ‘shared sovereignty’ and in whatever direction the dialogue process goes, both the Government of India and NSCN-IM must not overlook the fact that too many stake holders are involved in the peace process.

Th Muivah was saying sovereignty of Nagaland should be with Naga people just as sovereignty of India lies with Indian people.

When neither the Government of India nor NSCN-IM leadership bothers to explain what exactly shared sovereignty is, it is either unintelligible or left to speculations.

Both the parties have been keeping the deal a closely guarded secret within their own bosoms.

When so many sections have put their stakes in the peace process, they would definitely like to know what is going on at the negotiating table and they have the moral right to know what has been agreed upon.

The longer the stake holders are kept in the dark, the greater would grow the inquisitiveness and the concomitant social unrest.

At the same time, the total incompatibility between the Government of India’s assurance and NSCN-IM’s demand has only heightened people’s apprehension, anxiety and scepticism.

After all, all the stake holders deserve a little more than a riddle after all these years of negotiation and prolonged wait.

The riddle called the Naga peace accord and its secrecy would not have such a disturbing psychological impact on the stake holders if there is some compatibility between what Mr Modi said and what Mr Muivah insisted.

To remind our readers, Prime Minister Narendra was saying that the territorial integrity of the neighbouring States of Nagaland would not be affected.

We would like to appeal to both the parties to play the game fair and square.