Nagaland state was inaugurated as the 16th state of India on Dec.1, 1963 pursuant to the passing of the state of Nagaland Act in 1962 by the Parliament of India. The statehood was the culmination of the agreement after a series of negotiations, starting with the signing of the 16-point agreement in 1960.
Among the 16 clauses of the agreement, along those that dealt with the nomenclature and administration there were some notable clauses that significantly differentiated the proposed state of Nagaland from the other states in India. The most unique feature was that the ministry in-charge of Nagaland would be under the Ministry of External Affairs of the country. This was unique because it indicated that although Nagaland was a state under India there was a special agreement between two entities, if not equals, resulting in the statehood.
There was another clause wherein it was agreed that the Legislative Assembly would be constituted by elected and nominated members as may be deemed necessary representing different tribes. However elections were conducted in the hurriedly delimited 40 constituencies just a few months after the attainment of statehood like any other state in India. The other forms of representation was never tried nor tested and now the state currently has 60 constituencies, technically to enable better representation among the tribes. It is but contradictory that at present some of the minor tribes, although recognised, have no elected representatives.
Another important clause of the agreement was the need for the Government of India to pay out of the consolidated fund of Nagaland and other grant-in-aids to meet the administrative costs of the state.
While some clauses are yet to be fulfilled till date, some were discarded only after a few years on the pretext of one thing or the other. It all started with the transfer of the ministry in-charge from Ministry of External Affairs to the Home Ministry in 1972. The then assembly led by the NNO government should have been made answerable. Probably by then any opposition to the government was already dichotomised between nationalists and pro-underground and somehow it was quietly accepted by the then Cabinet. Further, the special fund that serviced the debt of the state was also conveniently removed by 1989. Since then the state has been unable to plug its deficits during successive governments, regardless of the party in power. Next to the creation of the state, the next biggest enactment was the amendment of the constitution to add Article 371(A). The main idea behind this article was already contained in Clauses 7 and 8 of the 16-point agreement except that the Naga Tribunal, meant for arbitration of cases decided according to customary laws, was never implemented. The one article with provisions to protect religion, customs, traditions and ownership of land and resources, instead became the bone of contention amongst the Nagas themselves. Article 371(A) is misinterpreted and misused against one another and the litigations based on it is unending. There is an unabashed Naga saying that everyone in Nagaland can these days cook Article 371(A). While on the other hand the many other clauses that protected the state’s interests as a whole were slowly taken off without much resistance from the grassroot.
Even at present the state is in a dilemma because the practice in Nagaland of representational form of allotting portfolios based on one’s district and tribe has been restricted. The 91st amendment of the constitution restricts the council of ministers not be more than 15% of the total strength of the House. The leaders were recently elected, but now except for the 12 Cabinet members the rest are is search of offices to serve and represent. It is a lesson well learned for our leaders that they need to be equally competent in macro management just as they are good at micro management— electoral politics.
