Some of those who voted YES had this to say:
• Yes, 33% WR certainly infringes the spirit of Naga customary practices which is also honoured under Article 371A. If any women reservation is required, let political parties reserve 33% of their nominations but not wards or constituencies.
• Yes, wards reservations based on gender is not a good idea. This will bring untold complications in the future. I don’t understand why the government of the day is being so stubborn and myopic.
• Yes, the Naga customary law or the civil administration of the civic bodies does not apply any reservation status for women in the society. They can enjoy equal rights with the Men folks to contest in any election, as far as the Naga customary law is concern.
• Yes, its a discrimination to Man
• Yes... Although I feel it's not about women discrimination, rather the preservation of the special act entitled only to the State of Nagaland. And its the very reason why, the GOI is trying to take it back to enforce its uniform civil code, while taking full advantage of the Bankrupt government, fading Nationalism and opposition less government.
• Yes it does because WR argues that due to patriarchal system and male dominance that 33% reservation should be implemented but a question is who defined our system patriarchal system was it from within ourselves or from the Outside? Secondly whose idea is it for reservation was it from within or outside. The only thing we knew was we had the right to govern independently and thus article 371A was implemented to protect our right to governance. And the same external force that defined us, that introduced this reservation is now trying to interfere in our self governance by infringing on this article with an aim to i believe to remove the said article..maybe Jallikattu stands as an example of the centres interference. And maybe Reservation is a way of centres interference in our customary practices.
Some of those who voted NO had this to say:
• No. 33% reservation has nothing to do with NCL. NCL is constructed procedure of justice and therefore cannot consider as "time immemorial" and given.
• No at all. It is just an excuse to oppose 33%WR.
• Article 371(A) has become a matter of Luxury. Where is the connection between 33% reservation and NCL. Naga Hoho should explain logically otherwise people will dismantle the importance of NCL because in reality it is constructed procedure of justice.
• I still haven't a clue how Article 243T affects Article 371A. And what is Naga customary law as far as 33% reservation for women is concerned?
• No. Election of men or women in Municipalities and Towns has nothing to do with customarily laws for the plain reason: Nagas had no governance by election in the past even by men, or no no towns then. If Article 371 (A) protects Naga customary laws, nomination is the way to select leaders and this, too, should be limited to the Village Republic system as in the past.
• No. Reservation is only to represent and uplift the women folk. It's modern time, Bhai. The women are not going to climb over the men; need not afraid. Naga customs and traditions are quite safe. It's not be an act of infringement. It's for the welfare of our sisters, mothers, aunties, wives, etc etc.
• No, First, It does infringes on that feudal customary laws. Second, 33% reservation is not at all covered under Article 371(A). It's not an Act of Parliament, it's a constitutional arrangement which our corrupt state assembly does not have the power to defy.
• First of all, what are those Naga customary laws specified on the Article 371(A) ? It does not stated in any way about women reservation being against the Naga customary law. The article is so obscure and needs to be well defined and stated clearly. So, it's a big NO.
• No not an inch. Art. 371 (A) clearly defines it
• Not at all. Urban local management is unrelated to gender biased customary "laws". If civil and tribal bodies insist that women's reservation infringes on Art. 371/A, then Nagas have to first of all do away with setting up towns (urban and semi urban) in the first place (which is too late anyway). Then do away with NLA and eventually the idea of a sovereign nation - since they rock and will rock the boat of what is perceived as unshakeable traditional customs. Positive change is inevitable to human progress. The earlier we confront our fear of change, the sooner our living standard will improve, primarily in relation to urban livelihood, which will also richly impact rural lives.
• No. Even if our culture and tradition bar the women from decision making we should shun such uncivilised practise to change for good. We can't be barbaric anymore. Or can we?
• No. In our tribe, i have heard many a times that, women are made synonymic to child and are considered unwise to have a say on any major decision making. Such immatured and stupid idea cannot and should not be our culture. If they are than i am shame of my culture and i hung my head in shame of such culture and also to be a man in such culture. Also being a Christian i consider that men and women are created alike by God and we should not discriminate anyone or gender. I wonder as to what absolute power has the tribal leaders of Hahas or Hohos have that they suppress people's freedom to contest election. Is 'might is right' part of our culture as well. Did they (tribal org) seek for people's opinion first. By banning towns to suppress the democratic norms and to oppose uplift the women, aren't our tribal bodies not any different from radical and mindless groups like Shiv Sena, MNS, VHP and ISIS.
• No, Unless it is amended it has nothing to do with the ulb election.
• No. It in no way infringes upon Naga customary law. It would have been legit if it was about the village councils but that's not the case here. Municipal and Town councils were never part of the Naga tradition and therefore, there's no question of infringing on customary laws. Article 371A of the constitution is greatly misread and misunderstood by most of the opponents of 33% reservation, I don't know if they're doing it deliberately or being naive and ignorant. They also tend to read only what they want to, setting aside the other provisions given in the same article. For the record, Article 371A protects only the Naga customs, traditions, laws and land and it's resources and not the entire legislations made by the parliament. Parliamentary acts which does not infringe upon Naga customs, traditions etc. can be implemented in the state of Nagaland as in any other parts of the country. Further, Article 371A is not absolute. The very article, which our civil bodies are quoting time and again, also empowers the Nagaland State Legislative Assembly to make amends or rectifications of the Central laws that are likely to come into conflict with the provisions given in article 371A and apply it in the state if it feels, it is for the good of the people and the state. Let's remember that no culture and tradition is static; what was good in the past may not necessarily be so in the present due to changed times and circumstances and therefore the need to change and adapt so as to move along with time and the rest of the world. For this very reason, Article 371A was not made absolute or static, room was given to make changes so that the good of the people of the state is not sacrificed on the alter of traditions which may not be applicable anymore. Thanks to the wisdom of those who frame it.
• A big No.... In fact nagas are making fun of themselves by opposing reservation without substantiating their real stand....
• No. 33% seat reservation for women folks doesn't infringe on our customary practices or Art 371A. Because election system itself is absent in the Naga customary law. But leave the final verdict to the wisdom of the legal luminaries.
• No...... Because i don't that there is such rules that prohibit reservation for women in Naga customary law.
• No it doesn't at all! Being against it is pure selective discrimination!
• No, it doesn't. Not implementing it denies equal rights to women
• Not at all. 33% reservation for women is a constitutional right.
• No. Article 371A, four points relates to customs and traditions practice within certain village jurisdiction and general rights of Nagas over resources in Nagaland while 33% women reservation is a municipal act amended in the Indian constitution.
Some of those who voted OTHERS had this to say:
• It should be discussed thoroughly by Nagas and GOI. And also why Nagas are accepting IPC even though we have customary law. I'm Confuse....!!
• "Treating equals equally n unequal unequally" to do justice to all.. We fail to understand this so we are all confused. Its not about art 371A or customary law. These two are just an excuses by both sides. The question here is "Is this Act of parliament/Supreme Court order applicable in our context/society?. N we too have to ponder ourselves whether women were/are subjugated or discriminated in our society.
• Whether it infringe Article 371(A) or not but it surely does affected our Naga Society hell lots with baselessly tagging Naga society as a society where we Naga womenfolks are discriminated. Had the NMA/JACWR used some other valid reasons to be in politics then I believe every Nagas would've supported their fight but they projected Naga Society very poorly when No Nagas opposed any womenfolks to be a politician /leader.
• May be, instead of asking whether 33% Women reservation infringes on Article 371(A)? We should be asking whether the whole Municipal and Town Council/ULB election infringes on Article 371(A). May be the answer to the first question lies in the ANSWER to the second question!! If it infringes, then the whole set up should be scrapped irrespective of 33% or not and find a new working system for our Municipals and towns.
• To me, i don't find any such infringement. But if the civil societies say so, they should come out clearly how... so that people can know and think over it. Because this is a serious matter, we should be careful before it is implemented. I personally do not favour this 33% reservation. If the govt. really wants to make way for women, i feel it would have been better with a lesser % initially.
• Nothing works...discussion or debating on 33% or 371A or customary or municipal election or Christian state....nothing works. Just let us seek an automatic favour from God. We the nagas will never change. We are still lacking behind in every angles and its too late to be with the rest of the world.
• First of all article 371 a is to uphold customary rights . Elections don't fall under this category as elections are purely secular in practise . Then also urban Dev ministry should scrap all the funds meant for muncipal bodies without elections no one should get hold of these funds
• I am not sure about It. Therefore I leave it upto Legal luminaries, protectors of Naga customs and traditions, politicians who are true representatives of their people, learned and well read members of civil society who are Nagas by blood to convince me and give a clear consensus on whether it's a yes or no. I am not well versed with the constitution of India to be confident and give a YES or NO. So, In the meantime. I am not going to take a chance. I am not going to gamble with article 371(A) which is the only armour Nagaland has against massive India right now.
• Article 371 (A) clearly protects Naga customary laws and its procedures aye? And since Art 371 has no relevance to Art 243/244 (which one is it?) there is no infringement, even if there is, it is very flimsy. Okay, quite interesting truly. Now that every ward/colony will have their councillor, town GB's (Chieftains), if you will, and his council members roles are more clearly defined- namesam GB's, since the real power will be in the hands of wards councillor. Is Nagaland the first and only state where this 33% Women Reservation is being implemented in India? If so, it wouldn't surprise me if Jammu & Kashmir is the next. Aye, in all honesty, gender equality is only theoretical in our society. But who really benefits from 33%? The Indian government who sows seeds of discord by pitting quasi-intellectuals and our women against our apex tribal bodies, and those willing to stand against any divisive incursion policy of Indian government, or those women who cannot speak Nagamese let alone English, but is an unopposed candidate-elect of her reserved ward. Of course, that candidate benefits, because she may not have the keen aptitude for town development; may lack education to effect necessary modernised civilised changes, but she will have a host of people (gender no bar) from her party backing her up. So there!
• Let me make it clear. It may be or it may not be the question of infringing Art 371. The question is about bad politics with ulterior motive the GoI (RSS/BJP) is playing against the Nagas. Let me also remind you, in 2010 when Cong- I was in power the opposition BJP/RSS demanded Art 370 & 371 to be scraped/amended from the IC but the foundation of these two Article 'are' too strong to be moved. Now, the main target of RSS is Art 370 of (J&K) so, by way of manipulating Art 371 they want to get even in J&K. Since T.R. Zealing made the Nagas appear more foolish, the GoI is about to touch 371 first. Nobody understand why Naga women are so short sighted or cant think and see beyond tomorrow. Announcement of thousand crore rupees of urban development schemes funds after ULB election has truly blinded our Naga women folk. The future generation will hold them responsible and answerable. Now it is more crystal clear, those Nagas taking part in ULB election with 33%WR shall be party with GoI in trampling and suppressing the rights, freedom and protection wall of the Nagas guaranteed by Art 371 of IC. Hope there are no anti-Naga Nagas!
• I think 33% reservation for women is not entirely undermining manhood, yes, it is absolutely reactionary to inherently naga customer law and a little contrastive to article 371 (A) but showing much aggressive and barricading to their privileges is also downtrodening them (women). So for voting,I will vote to as much as women contestant and would like to keep my adherence to naga customary law.
