Imchen clears air over his resignation

Veteran politician and four-time legislator from 28 Koridang assembly constituency, Imkong L Imchen, who resigned from the 13th Nagaland Legislative Assembly on January 21, said that the decision to resign from the NLA was “to uphold the mandate of the people.”
Talking to Nagaland Post on Sunday here at his residence, Imchen said he decided to resign due to some compelling factors under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution of India and in order to display his morality of public mandate while occupying public office. On the merger of 21 NPF legislators with NDPP, where Imchen was also among them, he said there were certain political compulsions and also the legislators had come together to form an opposition-less government to pursue solution to the vexed Naga political issue as facilitators.
While wondering how forming an opposition-less government could have had any impact, Imchen said they (MLAs) were neither a party to the negotiations nor involved in the Naga political talks. However, since majority of the legislators were of the opinion that a merger would be better suited, Imchen said he went along with the decision.
When asked why he decided to resign from the NDPP, Imchen said he was concerned as NDPP was not a functioning party. He also mentioned that he was not impressed by the functioning of NDPP as it was the same as NPF. Imchen said he chose to join BJP after observing the initiatives being taken up by BJP both at the Centre and State level, under leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Pointing out that there was clear direction and dynamism in the functioning of BJP, Imchen said he was ready render his services to the party.
When asked about his views on whether election should have been deferred, he said holding elections was a constitutional obligation and once elections are announced there was no room for deferring it.
While admitting that he was in favour of deferring the polls vis-à-vis settlement of the Naga issue, Imchen however said: “Election process is a constitutional mandate, and once it is done, we are there for five years.” When asked whether, if elected, he would be willing to step down in the event a solution is arrived at after polls, Imchen said such a decision has to be taken collectively by all 60 legislators.
Further, Imchen lamented that despite the Centre willing to resolve the Naga issue, the division within the society including the negotiating groups were a concern. He noted that some groups were in favor of the 1951 plebiscite, while some were in favor of the Framework Agreement. Imchen pointed that the “loophole” in the Framework Agreement was two different interpretations by both Government of India and the NSCN (I-M). Instead of trying to accommodate each other’s view point, he noted that both parties were rigid in their stand. “We are very sorry about it, but we have to speak the truth. The bitter truth. The mistake lies with us,” he stated. He also opined that “if government of India was refusing to concede to our demands, we should be willing to look for other options so as to make the negotiations open.”