After more than half a month since the Nagaland Legislative Assembly revoked the earlier assembly decision of September 2012 with regard to the Nagaland Municipal Act 2001 the apex tribal bodies of the Nagas, the Naga Hoho and the Eastern Naga Peoples’ Organisation (ENPO) have come up with an ultimatum to revoke the resolution of November 22, 2016 and restore the earlier resolution of September 22, 2012. The two organisations have given a dateline of 15 days for the government to convene a special session of the Assembly and heed to their demand else the two organisations will be compelled to initiates their own course of actions, meaning agitations.
The contention of the two organisations that Article 243(M) of the Constitution of India exempts the state of Nagaland may not hold water since this Article under Part IX-the Panchayats and not under Part IXA - the Municipalities. However, Article 243ZC in the same Part of the Constitution do state that nothing in that part is applicable to the scheduled areas and tribal areas as mentioned in Article 244; the areas falling under the Fifth and Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. Though Nagaland is not explicitly named under any of the Schedules it invariably is still a tribal state that was once part of it but now has its own special article in the form of Article 371(A).
Still, the tribal bodies’ demand for restoration of the assembly resolution of September 22, 2012 may be in the right direction as it was then resolved that Nagaland should frame its own law for the municipalities. The unique provisions under Article 371(A) of the Constitution of India gives this power to the Nagaland Legislative Assembly. Therefore, unless interpreted differently it means that the resolution of September 22, 2012 casts aside Part IX A of the constitution and exempted its application in the state. The NLA in consultation with the tribal bodies came to the conclusion that certain articles under Part IXA of the constitution infringes on the traditional practices of the Nagas. So it also withheld the Nagaland Municipal Act 2001 framed on the lines of Part IXA of the Constitution because Part IXA cannot be applied selectively and earlier in 2006 the government was forced to include Section 23A that pertains to women reservation as per Article 243(T) of the Constitution in the form of The Nagaland Muncipal (First amendment) act, 2006. Till now no new law pertaining to the municipalities and town councils could be enacted by the NLA. The delay was also attributed to the ongoing court case filed by the JAWCR and pending in the Supreme Court. Legal luminaries are also of the opinion that Part IXA should not have been brought in the first place if Nagas are not ready for women reservation.
The government led by the chief minister tried to form a consensus or tried to indicate that there was a consensus among the tribal bodies on the issue of women reservation as is the practice in Nagaland. In the case of previous chief ministers, even though a consensus was already in place such meetings and resolutions were held to make the statements and decisions official. Unfortunately, the so called consultative meeting of November 16, 2016 at Kohima with the tribal bodies was a total failure and the different responses from the leaders of the tribal bodies were different from the media releases received from the side of the government when the newspapers did their own investigations. Notwithstanding the opposition the government went ahead and revoked its earlier resolution of 2012 and amended the Nagaland Municipal Act 2001 one more time. The chief minister also cited Assam Tribal Areas (Administration of Town Committees) Regulation 1950 as an example of women reservation in the floor of the house which seemed misplaced since there have not been any known reservation for women in the town committees, but a House without an opposition saw little obstruction except by an independent member of the house. However in Dimapur district, there is a hurried implementation of 33% women reservation in the urban colony councils.
The general fear is that if Nagaland Legislative Assembly can state that Article 243(t) regarding 33% women reservation is not against the customary practices of the Nagas then any such similar laws on women reservation in any other body can be enforced as the law uses the same yardstick unless a line is clearly drawn by the Nagaland Legislative Assembly. So the consensus that Nagaland should frame its own laws and that it has to be a bottom-up approach and not handed down will have more supporters and should not be taken as a move against women reservation.
