Communal slur case
'Not malice, just rule of law'
Dimapur, May 30 (EMN): The president of the Naga People's Front (NPF) seeking anticipatory bail, even if no police complaint had been lodged against him, speaks about "his guilt" in uttering communal statements during the opposition's Lok Sabha by-election campaign, the Nationalist Democratic Progressive Party (NDPP) has stated.
The NDPP issued a statement on Wednesday clarifying matter associated with the party taking recourse following the reported communal statements of the NPF's Dr. Shurhozelie Liezietsu. The party referred to the opposition accusing the NDPP and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of having filed an FIR ordering the arrest of Liezietsu for “giving an inflammatory speech at an election rally held at Kohima.”
"The PDA (People's Democratic Alliance) is not vindictive in any manner, but we have only complained to the Election Commission of India on the grounds that the NPF president has tried to influence voters on the grounds of religion and we have asked the appropriate authority to ensure justice as per the law," the party stated. "The president knows very well what he uttered and his taking anticipatory bail speaks volume of his guilt."
The NDPP-BJP did not file an FIR, the press release clarified. The party stated that it had only lodged complaints with the returning officer and the Election Commission that Liezietsu had violated section-3 of the Election Model Code of Conduct, section-125 of the Representation of Peoples Act of 1951, and section-153 A of the Indian Penal Code.
Further, the NDPP took note that Liezietsu had been claiming his statement to be one he made to "protect Article 25 of the Constitution of India on the freedom of religion." This is unfounded, the NDPP stated. The reason the NDPP gave was that section-1 of Article 25 of the Constitution states a rider with the freedom: 'Freedom of Conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion is 'subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion.'
The NDPP-BJP stated that it does not refute or challenge what has been laid down in the constitution. However, it explained, since the by-elections was announced, the Code of Conduct came into effect across Nagaland besides the provisions of the RPA coming in force.
"Therefore, as section-1 of Article 25 of the constitution states: 'Subject to public order…' It is considered that both the MCC as well as the RPA are public orders since they define the dos and don'ts during the election process being in place throughout the state," the ruling party stated.
Again the party explained that even in normal circumstances the IPC, which governs all criminal activities, states in section-153 A that “promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony….” is punishable under law.
Therefore, the statement added, the claims of Liezietsu propagating and 'defending' Article 25 holds no merit as 'he is still in violation of sections-3 of the MCC, 125 of the RPA and section 153A of the IPC.'
'Therefore, the NPF party should not be trying to justify its president's actions while it is very clear that he has violated laws under the Constitution of India!" the party added.
