The recent exchange of words on an array of issues pertaining to various decisions of the state government reflects the state of confusion among the people and the leaderships of the state; it also indicates that a time has come for some retrospection and redefining terms that define the structure of the Naga polity. Along with the identity of the Nagas in India and Myanmar and the nearly two decades of peace process that is not isolated to the present Nagaland state only, albeit absence of strong capable leaderships in all the forums has brought an era of confusion for the people. The effect and the ensuing divide due to the certain decisions and stands like that of the state government on the 33% women reservation and the Naga Hoho stand on the Rongmei recognition issue has become contentious issues having wide ramifications. Nagaland since statehood relied excessively on certain accepted conventions and ignored to legally structure the traditional bodies thus also failing in codification of the respective traditional laws and practices.
As envisioned during the time of statehood, the state enacted the Nagaland Village Councils and Area Councils Act 1978 and after four amendments it is currently the Nagaland Village Councils (Fourth Amendment) Act 2009. This Act automatically has made the village councils as statutory bodies under the state and since 2009 the tribal bodies were also legally recognised by the state to work along with the government on the affairs of the state. However the confusion still persists on what will be the apex body of all the tribal bodies together with the current Naga Hoho and the Eastern Naga Peoples Organisation as two parallel bodies within the state, further with the former having constituents from the tribes outside Nagaland.
Technically, these organisations are not longer Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs), as it were referred for many years, but are political bodies. Maybe not in the sense of the political party registered under the Election Commission of India but no doubt are since it has a link to the government through a constitutional amendment and an Act. The same goes for the Village Councils but it would be profane to term a village council as political according to the present Naga mindset shaped since statehood. Likewise the remaining tribal sub-bodies are also all political as long at the state considers the tribal body as a political entity.
On the other hand there are also newer bodies being formed by some of the tribal bodies coming together to form Nagaland specific tribal bodies and apex bodies as opposed to the Naga Hoho. The Nagaland Tribes Council is one such body that was constituted on the powers conferred by the apex bodies of the tribes. It has taken a strong stand on the Rongmei recognition issue too. However it gave a statement in reply to certain criticisms by citizens that it is not a political body since it is still not registered under the state government though its constituents are registered.
Will it be an antithesis to Article 371(A) if the tribal bodies are not given powers under an Act of the state, since some tribes did not have an apex body till recent times? Should the Legislative Assembly have an upper house of the tribal representatives so that issues like the present ones are taken care of to avoid the divide in the Naga society? Just as the tribal bodies are given legal recognition through an Act of the state can it also be controlled under certain legal sanctions? The current gap between the two entities, the state Legislative Assembly and the tribal bodies has to be narrowed and a re-definition of the Naga system the need of the hour.
