As children, we sat around the fire and listened to stories, not just for entertainment, but for identity.
As children, we sat around the fire and listened to stories, not just for entertainment, but for identity. Stories of warriors who defended our land, of elders who governed with wisdom, of a people who refused to bow to any foreign force. We grew up believing that our way of life was not just tradition but sovereignty, something sacred that no power could take from us.
Today, that belief is being tested.
Our forebears did not endure hardships and negotiate with Delhi so that their descendants would one day watch their rights slip away. They did not fight to safeguard our identity only for us to wake up one day and find our indigenous lifestyle criminalised by laws passed in distant halls of power. Yet, that is precisely what is happening.
• The recent detention of Mr. Vikuto Swu of Lazami village for hunting a monitor lizard in 2024, and the penalisation of Mr. Kebehulo Kemp for consuming a snake in 2025, highlights an urgent question: Is article 371A doing its job of protecting our tradition, culture and indigenous way of life?
Conservation and Culture: Can co-exist…
Nagas have always lived in harmony with nature. Our traditional hunting practices were never about greed; they were governed by indigenous wisdom, centuries-old customs that ensured sustainability. Even today, many villages enforce their own conservation policies, such as seasonal hunting bans and restrictions on certain species.
We are not against conservation. We understand its importance. But conservation must be pursued with the people, not imposed upon them.
Article 371A: A Shield That Must Be Strengthened
Article 371A was never meant to be a passive safeguard, it was meant to empower us. It grants Nagaland the constitutional right to determine how laws apply to our land, particularly in areas concerning religion, social practices, customary law, land ownership, and resource management.
But today, instead of a reinforced Article 371A, we are witnessing its gradual weakening. The implementation of the Wildlife Protection Act in Nagaland is not just about hunting, it is about governance, self-determination, and our ability to expand our sovereignty, not shrink it.
The Role of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA)
Article 371A explicitly states that no Act of Parliament shall apply to Nagaland in key areas unless the Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA) debates and consents to it.
This means that before the Wildlife Protection Act was implemented in Nagaland, the NLA had the authority to assess, amend, or reject its applicability. Whether through oversight, external pressure, or an attempt to align with broader conservation policies, apparently the Act was allowed to take effect without fully considering its cultural implications.
However, governance is complex. Laws are often introduced with good intentions, but their full impact may not always be immediately clear. It is entirely possible that when the Wildlife Protection Act was considered, its consequences on traditional hunting practices were not fully anticipated.
But now that we see the consequences, the question is : Can we use this moment to reinforce Article 371A and ensure that such oversight never happens again?
Beyond Protection: Strengthening Our Sovereignty
This issue extends beyond just conservation laws. If we allow external laws to override Naga traditions without question, we set a dangerous precedent. Today, it is about wildlife protection. Tomorrow, it could be about land acquisition, taxation, mineral rights, governance, or even the erosion of our political identity.
Instead of passively defending Article 371A, we should be working toward Strengthening local governance structures so that laws and policies affecting Nagas are drafted and enforced by Nagas themselves.
If every law passed by Delhi is accepted by NLA without proper and thorough consultation with the people, the existence of Article 371A becomes irrelevant.
What Needs to Be Done?
This is not just about preventing the weakening of Article 371A. It is about strengthening it and ensuring that we move toward greater sovereignty, not away from it.
The NLA can reassess the Wildlife Protection Act and take legislative action to either amend or modify its enforcement in Nagaland.
A permanent legal review system can be established to ensure that no external law is enforced in Nagaland without thorough scrutiny.
Civil societies, student bodies, and indigenous leaders must work together to ensure that no law undermines the spirit of self-governance that Article 371A embodies.
The people of Nagaland must be actively engaged in discussions about how we can use Article 371A to move toward greater autonomy rather than just maintaining the status quo.
Conclusion: Defending and Expanding What Was Earned
The erosion of Article 371A will not happen in one dramatic moment. It will happen step by step, with each silent surrender, each law passed without debate, and each decision made without consulting the people. Pretty much like what happened to article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir.
But instead of waiting for erosion to happen, we could be actively building upon Article 371A, fortifying it, expanding it, and using it as a tool to secure greater self-governance.
The autonomy we enjoy under Article 371A was not freely given to us, it was earned through struggle and negotiation. And anything earned must be defended.
A locked door can only protect us if we hold the key, but why freeze at holding the key when we should be building stronger walls, fortifying our foundations, and securing our future?
The future of Article 371A depends on us. It is the closest thing to the aspirations of our forefathers that we have achieved. Not just our leaders, but the burden to protect it is on every Naga who believes in the right to self-governance. Take time to ponder….
[This is not about wildlife conservation but the danger associated with being complicity in self destruction]
Aga Rengma
Convenor, Western Naga Youth Front