[dropcap]B[/dropcap]y the sixteenth point agreement (16-PA), the erstwhile Naga Hills district of Assam became a State and part of Indian Territory. A section of the Nagas formally and voluntarily joined the Union of India and accepted its Constitution. But the other section of Nagas rejected 16-PA and continued to struggle till today to achieve the goal of Naga sovereignty. The persistence of nationalist element is however all too prominent as the GoI not only failed to contain it in over sixty years of its independence but allow it to thrive. The existence of multiple de-facto governments in Nagaland State is a glaring proof. Nonetheless, 16-PA affected all sections of Nagas in Nagaland State, irrespective of whether one had accepted or rejected 16-PA.
Article 371A
After the creation of the State of Nagaland, it was conferred with a special status by the provisions of Article 371A. Interestingly, all the clauses of 16-PA were not given constitutional statute when Article 371A was framed. When Article 371A was incorporated into the Constitution of India through the thirteenth constitutional amendment, the Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA) was given three years time-frame from the date of formation of the State of Nagaland to give suggestions for removal of any difficulty in giving effect to any of the provisions experienced during the transitional period. But the NLA in principle accepted Article 371A as it was.The creation of Nagaland State was unique in that the normal States’ re-organization provisions of the Constitution had no direct consequential effect on Nagaland. Therefore, circumstantially, it has no parallel either with other States or Jammu & Kashmir which was granted special status under Article 370 through the Instrument of Accession in 1949. While, in the case of Jammu & Kashmir the arrangement was temporary in nature as clearly defined, the case of Nagaland was not so. Yet, it did not mean that Nagaland was absolutely insulated from review. On joining the Union of India, Nagaland State is also equally vulnerable as any other State. This was so because there was precedence. Firstly, the affairs of the State was shifted from the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in 1972. Secondly; the funding for Nagaland as special category State was withdrawn in 1989. Even in the case of Naga Customary laws and procedure, the constitutional jurisprudence is slowly but steadily taking precedence, especially in trying the criminal cases. Under the circumstances, it may not be far from now that the special provisions of Article 371A will unconsciously or sub-consciously evaporate with time.
Whether Article 371A will face the same fate as Article 370 is still too early to predict. Nevertheless, the common perception has been already felt. Should Article 371A be reviewed or take spontaneous effect as a consequence of uniform civil code, it is for the State players to respond. The onus is with the NLA to decide on the fate of its people in consultation with the legal and constitutional luminaries as well as the popular opinion of the stake holders. The section of Nagas who still believe that they are not Indians and Nagaland is not India’s territory would continue to say they have nothing to do with the Indian State’s affairs. Can such situation trigger the Nagas of Indian State that had accepted 16-PA to withdraw from the Union of India and join the nationalist group? Will India use brute force again to quell such so-called anti-India stand? Can the Nagas withstand the brutality of India once more? Such chances and questions, however remote, are something that cannot be ignored.
Uniform Civil Code (UCC)
Article 44 of Indian Constitution envisaged that; “The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”. Article 1 (3) (a) of the Constitution defined the Union territory as those including the territories of the States. By this definition, Nagaland State too became the territory of India by the provisions of Article 371A. There is a perceived apprehension that if the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government goes ahead with the implementation of uniform civil code as promised in BJP’s election manifesto, Article 371A too will become a natural casualty. But whether UCC’s implementation will have a sweeping ambit on all issues; political, social, economic and religion or selectively include specific subjects is still under wrap. There’s no denying the fact that the core objective of BJP on UCC is to tame all tantrums. On the other hand, it may be interpreted as an attempt to up lift the status of the minorities. If such level-playing is the objective, will it mean that subjective discriminatory laws such as Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), 1958; Disturbed Area Act, 1955, etc. against the minorities will also become automatically void? Will it also mean equality of status and of opportunity as promised in the Preamble of the constitution? Can the NDA government bridge the gap in economic development and employment opportunities? Equal opportunity should mean delivering justice; social, economic and political, at the door-step of all sections of people as envisaged in the Preamble of the constitution. As of now those promises are in theory only. Inequality exists not only in economic development and employment but even in the mindset of the higher castes. Can they treat the tribal people as equal human beings? Will UCC be able to stop higher castes’ atrocities against the minorities? As long as this mindset exists, UCC will be a failed experiment.
Secularism
The Preamble of the Constitution pledged India to be a secular State. In other words, there’s no State religion and all sections of Indian citizens are free to profess, practice and propagate religion of their choice. Right to practice religion is conferred under article 25 to 28. It even ensured freedom for those who have no religion. It also restrains discrimination on grounds of religion. The Preamble promised to its citizens; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. The secular sections of Indian citizens suspect that BJP is out to impose Hinduism as the State religion or constitutionally ban conversion of Hindus to other religions. Conversion is a personal choice. Anti-conversion bills and acts are anti-secular and anti-constitutional because it infringe upon the fundamental rights. Christians are accused of converting Hindus through the medium of education. But have the Christians in Christian majority States created any problem to Sainik schools; believed to be the student wing of RSS? If a Hindu wants to send his child to a Madrasa or Christian run school, it is a personal choice. A Christian institute will indoctrinate Christian culture, a Sainik school will indoctrinate Hindu culture and a Madrasa will indoctrinate Muslim culture. If Hindus want consolidation of their religion in Hindu majority areas, should that be a problem to other religious communities? In the same way, if Christians want consolidation of Christianity in Christian majority areas, should that be a problem to the Hindus? All that matters is that, conversion to any other religion should not be through force, appeasement, inducement and other deceptive methods.
Article 48 of the Constitution has clearly defined that prohibition of cow slaughter is only in relation to organization of agriculture and animal husbandry. It has nothing to do with religion. If the BJP-led NDA government wants to give religious face to the article, it has to do away with secularism first.
Secularism is the fabric of national integration. For most Indians, we know that national integrity comes before religion. Without secularism there can be no India. If Hindus want Hindustan, no force on earth can compel other religious groups to join it against their wishes. I don’t believe that BJP will be foolish enough to shake this hornet’s nest. In the global politics of today, no nation however strong is absolutely independent. Any law that has conflicts with the inner mind will only ignite and promote rebellion of mind and a rebellion against suppression and oppression. The constitution bars the majority from suppressing and oppressing the minority because democracy is not just about majority but also about minority. Without the minority, it will be nothing but dictatorship. Without dictatorship Hindutva and Hindustan is beyond India’s reach. History has proved that ‘hero worship’ and not dictatorship is in Indian blood.
Conclusion:
The people of India have given massive mandate to the BJP and its alliance partners including the NPF. BJP received the people’s mandate on the promises made in its election manifesto. Therefore, it is well within its right to implement its manifesto; be it Article 370 or 371A, UCC and/or a rethink on secularism. With a section of Naga electorates giving their mandate to NDA, there’s no space for Nagas to complain even if the worst comes. Number is not the problem for BJP for any major decisions. The only hitch the NDA government may face is Article 368 of the Constitution which prevents amendment to the basic structure of the Constitution regardless of the number. The Preamble contains the basic structure of the Constitution. Any rush in these sticky issues will have far-reaching ramifications which the NDA government will ill-afford to risk. Ultimately, implementation of the promises made may scale down to subjective and regional/local circumstances. In the end, it will be up to the people of India, especially Hindus, whether they will accept or reject the scale down. The future of NDA and its government will naturally be weighed on this delicate balance.
Dr. K. Hoshi Phek Town
