RPP’s Suggestion on Naga Peace Process is a Misconception
RPP’s Suggestion on Naga Peace Process is a Misconception
In the last para of the statement of RPP (Rising People’s Party) published in local papers dated 17.3.2025 rightly anticipated that their expressed opinion will invite reaction from certain quarters.
In the last para of the statement of RPP (Rising People’s
Party) published in local papers dated 17.3.2025 rightly anticipated that their
expressed opinion will invite reaction from certain quarters. I agree with RPP
as to the poor performance of the Govt. of Nagaland as facilitator is
concerned. After having removed the last Interlocutor RN Ravi, what audacity
the very Govt. had to demand for appointment of another Interlocutor from GoI
of late besides demanding the third party intervention in the process? Having
made the promises in every State election by every political party that when
elected, one would pave the way for Naga political solution, it is expected
that the ruling Govt. in particular would walk the talk. Completely contrary to
the promise made before God and men, the State Govt. intentionally reopened the
most sensitive chapters of Naga sovereignty and integration issues which were
mutually sidelined by the signatories of Framework Agreement and Agreed
Position in view of contemporary political realities. After successfully
removing the last Interlocutor RN Ravi, calling AK Mishra, the Emissary, as
Interlocutor does not make him the Interlocutor apart from wishful thinking.
All these flip-flops found in local papers dated 5.3.2025 are but aimed at
thwarting political solution rather than facilitation to say the least.
Meanwhile, look at the mandatory oath of a contesting
candidate has to take at the time of filing nomination including any dummy
(standby) candidate: “I do swear in the name of God or I solemnly affirm that I
will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law
established and that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India.”
Lest every candidate takes the oral oath followed by signing on the pro forma,
one cannot file nomination papers. The elected candidate will once again take
the same oath during the first session of the Assembly for the second time.
Within 6 months of the election, one has to take oath in the Assembly. Those
who are appointed as Ministers will take the same oath for the third time and
then sign in the register before the Governor.
Having committed so, the elected or contested candidate is
not a Naga national cadre. The 60 MLAs are, therefore, not Naga national
workers. Whereas, the Naga political issue is outside the purview of those who
have taken the said oath. The Naga sovereignty issue is the exclusive subject
matter for the Naga National workers.
Whereas, the Naga political issue was negotiated between the
GoI and the two Naga negotiating political groups, namely NSCN(IM) and Working
Committee (WC) of 7 NNPGs under the atmosphere of Ceasefire as we all know.
Both the groups have had basic agreements called Framework Agreement of 2015
and Agreed Position of 2017 respectively. More importantly, both the groups had
completed the necessary negotiations under these two agreements and declared
the transactions as closed by 31.10.2019. The State Govt. of Nagaland had
announced the successful closure of the political negotiations in the
Governor’s address to the Assembly Session in January, 2020. Thus, the progress
report on political negotiations has become the official property of the
Assembly since then, and no elected member can disown what was read out by the
Governor as the speech is always approved by the State Cabinet.
Only when the Naga political negotiators and the signatories
in particular and the Naga public in general understand and uphold the essence
of the hard earned Ceasefires under which congenial atmosphere, the Naga representatives
had years and months of political parleys with the GoI on the Naga political
issue and that subsequent agreements being made, and the process had been
officially concluded keeping the solution to follow. Whereas, those agreements
were made with the best efforts of the negotiators, and we cannot expect more
than what has been achieved in the present context. Thus, whoever undermines
the developments so far achieved will only degrade the Naga political status.
The above being the political reality, what RPP has
suggested will only boomerang against the Naga interest. It is unethical and
there is no legality for those elected members to handle what is outside their
purview. If the proposal is to be perused, we will erase what political
achievements we have so far made back to square one. If the proposal is to be
accepted, we have to be satisfied with the existing Statehood. I consider such
opinion to be a meronym of dumping the Naga political issue in a dustbin. No
matter how divided and how weak the Nagas are, let us not consign our present
and future to hopelessness.
