9-point agreement
1. The agreement had clearly defined subjects as ‘self-administered subjects’ and ‘jointly administered subjects, a kind of diarchy system seen in Mont-Ford Reform proposed for Indians. Incidentally, Gandhi rejected the proposal and adopted Swaraj (self-rule) policy and program.
2. Point No. 2 (Executive powers) and point no. 6 (Boundaries) clearly defined self-administered areas – Naga National Council (NNC) controlled areas.
3. It had provision for observation of implementation and review after 10 years. In other words, 9-point agreement kept the door open for further discussion after ten years.
4. NNC insisted for separate implementation but the constituent assembly ignored it and tried to incorporate the articles (1 to 8) of 9-PA into sixth schedule of the draft constitution of free India. NNC objected to such incorporation and made clear that it would not accept the draft sixth schedule.
5. The constituent assembly offered three assembly seats in Assam legislative assembly and Autonomous District Council under Assam State. NNC rejected both. Voluntary total non-participation in the elections of republic India in 1952 and 1957 were decisive show of solidarity to that effect.
16-point agreement
1. NPC neither proposed nor insisted for separate implementation of the agreement. Instead, NPC pushed hard for constitutional status.
2. Constitution amendment bill called ‘The Nagaland Bill, 1962’ was passed by Indian parliament and ‘The Nagaland Act, 1962’ created Nagaland as the sixteenth state in the Union of India. The Government of India (GOI) created the State by enacting separate Act (The Nagaland Act, 1962). That was the major difference with other tribal states (erstwhile hills excluded areas of Assam) created in the sixth schedule. The 13th Constitution amendment created Article 371A, promising safeguards to Nagas as agreed in 16-PA. It allotted two MP seats in Indian Parliament based on delimitation of seats by population ratio like all other States.
3. The Nagaland Bill, 1962 left out two points from the agreement; point 12 (consolidation of forest areas) and point 13 (consolidation of contiguous Naga areas). The GOI failed to implement those points separately. The GOI also dishonored point 2 (the Ministry in-charge, by shifting Nagaland from MEA to MHA in 1972).
4. NPC tried to end Naga aspiration for independence by accepting constitutional state (Nagaland State) in the Union of India. It was plain from the contents of 16-point agreement that NPC accepted statehood as final. The result is obvious. Statehood has become India’s liability. That is why the GOI is still looking for solutions to problems of her own creation.
5. Sixteenth point agreement had no provision for review after a timeframe. This is one of the major differences between 9-point agreement and 16-point agreement.
Analytical perspective
NNC’s idea and objective at the time of signing 9-Point Agreement was to keep Nagas and Naga territories partly as self-administered areas (transferred list) and partly, as jointly administered areas (reserved list) with India as the guardian power. Unlike 16-point agreement, 9-point agreement did not even propose for externally administered areas. Nagas also rejected ‘Mandatory State’ because, once independent India received mandate from British to govern Nagaland, there would be no turning back for Nagas. Right from pre-independent India period, NNC had fought to stay out of Indian Union. When that did not work, NNC declared Naga independence on August 14, 1947, one day ahead of Indian independence. From that day onwards, our rights became nation and nationality rights. That was historical fact. NNC successfully uphold its policy of staying outside Indian Union up to 1960. Regrettably, Naga People’s Convention (NPC) did some damage to that policy by signing 16-PA with GOI on July 28, 1960, facilitating the GOI to enact Article 371A.
On April 4, 1960, NNC warned NPC not to create a mal-situation by trying to set up ‘condominium’ (joint rule) in Nagaland because independent Nagaland had already formed Provisional National Government called Federal Government of Nagaland. NPC ignored NNC’s warning and went ahead to sign 16-PA. It left out other Nagas. That was the greatest setback for Nagas. NPC applied the policy of ‘divide first and consolidate later’. The policy betrayed Nagas as evident from non-implementation of point 12 and 13 of 16-PA. Until 1957, NNC was in complete control of Naga territories. The GOI too took NNC as the only authentic body representing the entire Nagas. The GOI had political discussions with NNC only. After statehood, the GOI could no longer ignore the State government. It created a mal-situation as predicted by NNC and that mal-situation has continued until today. In desperate quest for solution, will Nagas create another mal-situation, jeopardizing Naga nation’s interest for decades again? God will judge and posterity will condemn for any misadventure.
