The attention of the Naga Hoho has been drawn by an Article “Mere Population Integration: Not Acceptable” written by Mr. Kuolachalie Seyie which appeared in some of the local dailies on 16th September 2016. The Naga hoho is constrained to clarify the matter in the interest of the general public so as to clear the doubts and confusion once and for all.
1. The writer has alleged the Naga Hoho that “ 15 Tribes of Manipur state comprising a population of approximately about 5.65 Lakhs, have 30 official representatives in the Naga Hoho whereas, 20 lakhs population of Nagas of Nagaland have 16 official representatives but as of now is 10 in Naga Hoho”. It is to clarify that, affiliated units of Naga Hoho within the state of Nagaland is 8 (eight) tribes and not 10 (ten) as claimed by the writer excluding the eastern bloc. And since the inception of Naga Hoho, the representation was 2 (two) representatives from each tribe. However, with the growing demand for more representation in the Naga Hoho Assembly according to population, the Naga Hoho constituted a committee to review the Yezhabo (Constitution). Accordingly, the Constitution was reviewed and amended on 10th October 2013. Article -6 (2) read “ The Federal Assembly shall have representation based on tribe population and jurisdiction as follows; - Less than 50,000 population – 2 members, - Above 50,000 and less than 100,000 population – 3 members, - Above 100,000 population – 4 members”. Nevertheless, we are not concerned about the number of representatives from different region but the fact is that the Representatives from Nagaland state will have more on the basis of amended constitution.
2. The author had also alleged the Naga Hoho of bringing “host of representatives from... UNC (United Naga Council) from Manipur state to Hotel Japfu Kohima on 05.09.2008 to decide their views and opinion on Rongmei’s Recognition issue”. It is to clarify that on the 5th September 2015 Presidential Council meeting held at Hotel Japfu, Kohima, 12 members attended the meeting. Out of which 4 members does not have the voting right as they represent the subordinate units of Naga Hoho. However, 6 tribal Hohos from Nagaland and 2 tribal hohos from the south represented in the meeting. Therefore, the question of bringing hosts of representatives and manipulating the decision of the Naga Hoho decision does not arise.
The Naga hoho appeal to the concerned writer to clarify the matter from the office of the Naga Hoho for any confusion instead of rushing to the Press/Media which does more harm than good.
KENYUSENG TEP
Deputy Speaker
K. ELU NDANG
Assembly Secretary
