A senior Minister in the NPF Government TR Zeliang has objected to introduction of Nagaland Lokayukta Bill 2012 moved by Congress MLA C. Apok Jamir during the ongoing Budget Session of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly. After hearing the arguments from the Minister, the Speaker decided not to grant leave to move for introduction of the said Bill on the floor of the house. Once again we have invoked the letter and spirit of Article 371-A to oppose a forward looking legislation. It is anybody’s guess as to how many times our political class has diverted issues of public importance on the plea that Nagaland enjoys a special position under Article 371-A. No one is questioning the validity of ‘protection’ given to the Nagas under the Indian constitution. However there is obviously no consistency in the way we use Article 371-A and we seem to pick and choose as per our own vested interest. So we are good at opposing things like CBI, Lokayukta, women reservation etc—all aimed at changing the status-quo. But when it involves things like more powers and funding through various development programmes or even inviting Indian Multinational Companies or foreign agencies, our political class will not even blink to check whether our ‘Naga way of life’ i.e. our traditions, customs and conventions are being infringed upon.
If we accept the argument that the Nagaland Lokayukta Bill 2012 “impinges upon…Naga customary laws…or that “there is no question of outsiders, like some High Court Judges, getting appointed as Lokayuktas on our land to scrutinize our activities”, then by that same measure we may as well close down the proposed High Court in Kohima, dismantle the Department of Law & Justice, stop all development activities that infringes on the “Naga way of life” (there are many mind you) and perhaps we should not have anything to do with the present system of elections, political parties or even the parliamentary system of democracy. And if we do not want others to “scrutinize our activities” we should have also opposed the functioning of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), the Election Commission of India or the enactment of the Right to Information Act. The appointment of the Nagaland Information Commission should be also seen as violation of our Naga customary laws.
Off course the other part of the argument cited by the Minister (about the casual legislation) and accepted by the Speaker that the proposed Nagaland Lokayukta Bill 2012 does not contain the statement of objects and reasons and also the financial memorandum, this is perhaps something for the Congress member to work on. However it is quite clear that more efforts must be made by all concerned to tackle corruption. If we are not wrong, the NPF government was probably the first to publicly welcome the resolutions passed in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on the Lokpal Bill and went on to assure all “cooperation to all efforts and initiatives that would promote transparency. To refresh public memory, the three key demand put up by Team Anna was on the question of citizen’s charter, inclusion of lower bureaucracy and creation of Lokayuktas in the States. Whether having a Lokayukta (Ombudsman) in Nagaland infringes on Article 371-A or not, it’s now really up to the present government to demonstrate whether it is serious in taking on corruption.
