Ceasefire extension

Sir, - The Home Ministry has made a mess of the Nagaland `ceasefire' extension. It has neither done its home work, nor read the Constitution. It should read the minutes of the meeting Jawaharlal Nehru had with the Naga leaders on July 26, 1960, when they submitted a ``16-point resolution as the basis of negotiation with the Government for settlement''. (It was not a 16-point agreement but only a resolution). The 13th point was, ``The other Naga tribes inhabiting the areas contiguous to the present Nagaland be allowed to join Nagaland if they so desire''. Nehru's reply was, ``This was always open in the Constitution, but the moment one touches another area, the Government cannot decide. It was open and should be resolved by consent and agreement.''

This point was further clarified by the Government the next day. ``When the State is to be formed, areas have to be precisely given. If there are to be any additions, Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution have to be followed''. What does 3 and 4 say? ``Parliament may by law (a) form a new state, (b) increase the area of a state, (c) diminish the area of the state, (d) alter the boundaries of any state or (e) alter the name of the state, provided no Bill for the purpose is introduced in either Houses of Parliament, except on the recommendation of the President and unless where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the area, the Bill has been referred by the President to the legislature of that State for expressing its views.''

It may be difficult to withdraw the agreement with NSCN (I-M), but the attention of the people of Manipur has to be drawn to the Constitutional provisions and the Government could also consider extension of the ceasefire to all other areas, with the consent of the State, not just with `consultation'.

Murkot Ramunny,

Tellicherry, Kerala

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : An equal governance
Next     : Withdraw from Siachen