Rejects calls for President’s Rule, defends PAC’s role in Naga talks
DIMAPUR, SEP 14 (NPN): The ruling Naga People’s Front (NPF) has rejected calls by veteran politician Dr. SC Jamir for President’s Rule in Nagaland, as well as criticism from the Concerned Naga Forum of Nagaland (CNFN) of the state government’s efforts to push for a political-level interlocutor in the Naga peace talks.
NPF through its press bureau said Jamir’s remarks in Dimapur on September 12, in which he reportedly described governance as having “almost collapsed” and being “non-existent”, were factually incorrect and sought to undermine the state government’s efforts to secure an early and honourable solution to the Naga political issue. It also rejected the CNFN’s September 7 statement questioning the role of the Political Affairs Committee (PAC).
On Jamir’s call for President’s Rule, the NPF said Nagaland has a democratically elected government with a mandate from the people and argued that seeking its dismissal was undemocratic and contrary to the principles of federalism and the Constitution. It said previous periods of President’s Rule in Nagaland had neither brought lasting stability nor advanced the Naga political issue.
The party also rejected the claim that governance had collapsed, saying the state administration was functioning, development activities were continuing and the government remained engaged with the Centre over the Naga political issue. It described such allegations as an affront to the mandate given by the people.
Responding to allegations that chief minister Neiphiu Rio had tilted towards a particular Naga armed group, the NPF said such claims, without evidence, were irresponsible. The party said its policy was based on “equi-closeness” to all sections of Naga society, in contrast to the “equi-distance” approach it attributed to the Jamir era.
NPF also criticised the use of terms such as “Sabotage Club” or “Status Quo Club” to describe fellow Nagas, saying such rhetoric risked deepening divisions at a time when unity was essential. It argued that the delay in reaching a settlement stemmed from unresolved and complex issues between the Naga groups and the Government of India, rather than from any grouping within Nagaland.
On the PAC’s demand for a political-level interlocutor, the NPF said the process had suffered since the departure of former interlocutor RN Ravi, with negotiations subsequently being handled at the bureaucratic adviser level. It claimed that political parties, civil society organisations, tribal hohos, intellectuals and elected representatives had lost confidence in a non-political interlocutor.
The party said a consultative meeting convened by the PAC had unanimously called for the talks to be elevated to the political or ministerial level. According to the NPF, the demand was not for fresh negotiations but for a political mandate to conclude agreements already reached, arguing that the Naga issue was fundamentally political.
NPF also defended Rio’s announcement of a proposed ministerial-level committee, rejecting the CNFN’s question over the capacity in which the chief minister had made the announcement. It said Rio had led a high-level delegation, including members of the PAC sub-committee and both state MPs, to meet Union Home Minister Amit Shah in Delhi earlier this year.
The party said Shah had given an assurance regarding a ministerial team and that Rio had subsequently conveyed this through the media and announced it during the state assembly session.
Further, NPF defended the legitimacy of PAC, saying it comprises representatives of all political parties with elected members in the state government, along with the two MPs.
It rejected the CNFN’s allegation that PAC had made a “mockery” of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, saying its role was to facilitate an honourable settlement of the Naga political issue.
The party said NPF-led PDA government had worked to ensure that the talks were handled at the highest political level by an interlocutor with the authority and stature necessary to pursue an honourable and inclusive settlement. “The people want solution, not semantics and blame games,” the NPF said. The party asserted that what was required was a political representative with a mandate from the Centre to bring the negotiations to a conclusion.
It accused CNFN of opposing a political-level interlocutor and thereby allowing the talks to remain in limbo, while attempting to confuse the public through what it described as a “myopic vision” and media statements.
NPF reiterated its support for an early, honourable, inclusive and acceptable settlement to the Naga political issue.