The hoho in a press communiqué stated that consequent upon the imbroglio of 2017 ULB election initiatives, resulting in the death of several Naga youths, the Lotha Hoho and other Lotha organisations had disassociated from the then Naga Mothers Association
“The Lotha organisations therefore have not nominated any representative to the NMA. This is to say that the NMA, if it still exists, has no mandate of the Lotha tribe,” LH said.
It also clarified that neither the Lotha Hoho nor Lotha Eloe Hoho have knowledge of any Lotha member involved in the activities of NMA, and if that any Lotha member is involved in the NMA, Lotha Hoho “disowns such a member.”
The hoho stated that as per the Lotha and Naga customary heritage, the organisation (NMA) is expected to function for the welfare of the mothers and not act as a hindrance to the “common interests” of the Nagas.
“So why should the mothers interfere in the affairs of the Nagas, like going to the court of law or playing political roles?” LH questioned.
It went on to say that in spite of customary heritage, the Lotha Hoho can consider if inclusion of women members in any welfare group is necessary; but not as opposition to community interest, as is “seemingly being done by the un-mandated NMA.”
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=1]“Hence in short the Lotha Hoho does not consent to the act of the un-mandated NMA, challenging the authority of the state government and that of the Naga Tribal organizations,” LH said.
Meanwhile, LH also urged the state government and Naga elected leaders to streamline the applications of the Article 371 (A) in the activities and affairs of the state government and the common Naga public.
It alleged that so far the Naga leaders (state government) have not given due consideration for the applicability of the constitutional provisions under Article 371 (A).
The hoho also pointed out that the Nagaland Village and Tribal Council Act 1978, amended from time to time, is incomplete in that there is no well defined role of the Tribal Councils/organisations.
“The said Act has just half a page description of the Tribal organs and no defined guideline or role(s) to be played by the Tribal Councils. Perhaps the elected leaders are apprehensive of the rights of the civil organs and hence do not want to confer the rights, as provisioned under Art 371 (A) and Local Self Government under 16-Point Agreement,” it stated.
The hoho argued that had there been well-defined roles and rights of the tribal organisations, then the problem of one organisation pitted against another and also against the state government authorities “definitely should not have cropped up.”
The hoho cautioned that if Nagas keep on arguing among themselves as to the applicability or otherwise of provisions in Art 371 (A), a day may come when the special provisions of Art 371 (A) may be revoked.
It went on to say that there have been instances of Naga leaders and intellectuals who deliberately ignore the provisions of Art 371 (A) so that their immediate interests may be served, thereby demeaning the provisions of Art 371 (A).
The Lotha Hoho further stated that Article 371 (A) does not explicitly say anything on ‘Women Reservation,’ but among the various provisions, Art 371 (A) (i) (a) (i) and (ii) clearly provide that “no act of parliament shall apply in respect of “(i) religious or social practices of the Nagas,” and “(ii) Naga Customary laws and Procedures.”
“It is therefore amply clear that Women Reservation infringes on the provisions of Article 371 (A) (1) (a) (i) and (ii); as per our Naga heritage,” the hoho stated.
Also read: Yung Aung faces revolt from members