DIMAPUR, SEP 22 (NPN): NSCN Provisional Government, headed by chairman Ikato I. Chishi Swu, has rejected the “Competencies” submitted to the Government of India on January 2, 2020, alleging that the proposals were framed within the Indian Constitution and therefore deviated from the principles of the Naga political movement.
In a statement, Swu reiterated the position that Nagas have historically maintained a distinct political existence and that Nagalim was never a constituent part of either India or Burma. The statement traced the Naga political movement from the 1929 memorandum submitted to the Simon Commission and the declaration of Naga independence on August 14, 1947, to the Naga Plebiscite of May 16, 1951.
It claimed that 99.9 per cent of Nagas voted in favour of sovereign independence in the 1951 plebiscite and that the results were sent to the Government of India and the United Nations. It also referred to the boycott of the 1952 and 1957 Indian general elections and the NNC’s 1950 declaration that Nagas did not accept the Indian Constitution.
The statement referred to the 1964 ceasefire between the Government of India and the Federal Government of Nagaland, the 1975 Shillong Accord and the formation of the NSCN in 1980.
It said the 1997 ceasefire between the Government of India and NSCN was based on three conditions– talks without preconditions, at the Prime Ministerial level and in a third country. It said political negotiations subsequently took place at various locations, including Paris, New York, Bangkok, Osaka, Geneva and Amsterdam.
The statement highlighted the July 11, 2002 joint communiqué at Amsterdam, claiming that the Government of India recognised the “unique history and situation of the Nagas” and agreed that the issue was political in nature and required an accommodative and forward-looking approach.
It also referred to the fourth Naga People’s Consultative Meeting held at Hebron on January 20 and 21, 2005, which, according to the statement, supported an honourable solution based on the uniqueness of Naga history and situation, affirmed the legitimacy and non-negotiability of unification of all Naga areas, called for a peaceful political solution and urged sincerity from both parties.
It said the Framework Agreement signed on August 3, 2015 reaffirmed the recognition of the “unique history and position” of the Nagas and provided for sharing of sovereign power in specified areas of common interest.
It maintained that the agreement did not amount to compromise or surrender of Naga sovereign rights.
However, it alleged that the Government of India subsequently shifted its position, particularly after the death of NSCN chairman Isak Chishi Swu in 2016. It also alleged that the Government of India issued a three-month ultimatum in 2019 over the NSCN’s insistence on a separate flag and constitution.
According to the statement, a committee led by ‘lt. gen.’ V.S. Atem formulated the “Competencies”, which were submitted to the Government of India on January 2, 2020, without prior consultation with the National Assembly or Tatar Hoho.
The Provisional Government alleged that the “Competencies” were contrary to the Framework Agreement and the declarations of the 2005 consultative meeting. It said several provisions appeared to place Naga institutions within the Indian constitutional framework.
It specifically cited provisions under the “Competencies” concerning the functioning of the Tatar Hoho Election Commission in conjunction with the Election Commission of India; issuance by the President of India of a proclamation for assumption of office by the yaruiwo and kedallo; administration of oaths of midan kilonser and NRTC kilonsers by the governor of the concerned state; and representation of Nagas in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
The statement also objected to the provision stating that positive steps would be taken at the earliest towards resolving the issue of integration through an earnest political process. It questioned the absence of a defined timeframe and argued that the proposed Naga Regional Territorial Councils and District Councils could result in fragmentation rather than integration.
It further questioned provisions requiring consultation with the Pan-Naga Hoho until integration and said these were inconsistent with the stated objective of taking positive steps towards integration at the earliest.
The statement also questioned the provision that the agreement would constitute a constitution called “Yehzabo” covering its own competencies, arguing that constituent authority should rest with the Naga people. It objected to the provision that the Naga Yehzabo would be incorporated as a separate chapter in the Constitution of India.
It maintained that the provisions collectively represented a departure from what it described as the fundamental principles of the Naga political movement. It also objected to the absence of a temporal limitation, alleging that the proposals could entrench an indefinite arrangement within the Indian Union.
The statement referred to a November 7, 2024 statement attributed to NSCN general secretary and ato kilonser Th. Muivah, which warned that the NSCN would resume armed resistance if its political initiative was rejected by the Government of India.
It alleged that the Hebron leadership had neither rejected nor condemned the “Competencies” but instead defended them as a proposal still subject to negotiation. The Provisional Government argued that the proposals, if already framed within the Indian Constitution, could not ultimately stand outside that constitutional framework.
The statement accused the Hebron leadership of political manipulation and alleged that personal and financial interests had influenced the political process.
It said an Extraordinary Joint Emergency Meeting of civil national workers and Naga army officers of the NSCN/GPRN, held on July 21, 2026, at Mt. Horeb in Eastern Nagalim, then referred to as the Eastern Flank, declared the establishment of a “Provisional Government” until a full-fledged government was formed.
According to the statement, the meeting also condemned the Government of India’s approach to the Naga political issue and its alleged deviation from the principles of the Framework Agreement.
The statement said the July 21 meeting resolved that the ongoing talks between the Government of India and the Hebron leadership no longer represented the mandate of the Naga people.
It further stated that the meeting resolved to continue political resistance alongside armed resistance until, in its words, the “full length and breadth” of Nagalim’s sovereignty was restored.
Swu, on behalf of the Provisional Government, appealed to all Nagas to unite and work towards what the statement described as restoration of the “God-given rights” and sovereign existence of the Naga nation.
Wednesday, September 23, 2026