N Zubemo Lotha, LLM
Advocate, Gauhati High Court Assam
An infamous conflict within the church has arisen in Wokha and there have been news reports about the conflicting situation time to time in the newspapers and other social media. Efforts for reconciliation of the issue have been taken up by church leaders and civil societies but so far no possible solution seems to be taking place, and on the contrary the case is worsening. There are public opinions that the issue has originated from the church leaders themselves, and in time the church leadership has been divided into two groups each party claiming legitimacy to take charge of the Church headquarters. The district administration has been issuing prohibitory orders under sec 144 CrPC whenever there is news about meeting of the church leaders rendering every meeting to cancel, which could also be hindering possible negotiations between the church leaders. Could a motion of confidence be moved in the house as a test to see whether the present leadership or any other leadership enjoys the trust of the church?
Wokha Town Baptist Church (WTBC) also known as the Mother Church with the increase in members reorganised itself to establish three sector churches which were to run within the supervision and control of the mother church. In the present scenario, a major disagreement with regard to governance of Wokha Town Baptist Church (WTBC) has arisen; wherein some church leaders and elders for want of independence of the three sector church started an agitation in terms of a prior resolution that the three sector churches would be made independent soon after the 100 years anniversary celebration of the WTBC which concluded on December, 2019. In 2020, WTBC formed a Core Committee for active consideration of making independent the three sector churches and in furtherance of the Core Committee recommendations, the WTBC appointed provisional pastors-in-charge and supporting staffs to oversee the affairs of the three sector churches and allotted staff quarters to them. In a surprise move, the appointment of provisional pastors-in-charge was objected by the sector church pro-independence group who by overnight agitated and forcibly evicted the pastors and other staffs from their respective quarters for reasons known only to them.
To make matters worse, the agitating members of the three sector churches reported the matter to the Lotha apex churches organisation known as the Lotha Baptist Churches Association (LBCA) for intervention, where the LBCA by an arbitrary resolution interfered beyond its jurisdiction by granting recognition of independence and appointed its own Pastors in the three sector churches and were made directly reportable to the LBCA. Thereafter, the LBCA forcibly organised an ‘ordination day’ in all the three sector churches to install the new LBCA appointed Pastors, where in the programme certain WTBC senior church elders and ex-deacons got featured in the dedication programme and when these senior church members participated, the WTBC offensively took it as open disobedience and suspended their church membership.
Cracks ensued in the three sector churches in which the church members within came to be divided into two groups – simply known as pro-separatist group who stood by LBCA and the mother church group who stood by the decisions of WTBC. Usual church fellowship timings was forced to be divided into two shifts for both the party to follow with strict warning by the District Magistrate not to interfere in the fellowship of the other party, thus the freedom of church worship went into the hands of the Government authority. The WTBC strongly objected to this unjustifiable interference by the LBCA upon the internal affairs of its administration, which resulted into irreconcilable hostility between leaders of the WTBC and also the leaders of the LBCA. The general public represented by its civil societies as a neutral body came into inclusion to arbitrate on the indifferences within the WTBC on one hand and on the other hand to help resolve the conflict between the WTBC and the LBCA.
While the reconciliation efforts by all the responsible people of the Lotha Tribe was in progress, the LBCA further issued a statement to the Chairman of the Lotha Hoho, the apex organisation of the Lotha Tribe, to keep away from the affairs of the LBCA issues. Nevertheless, the church conflict being a general public issue, the Lotha Hoho in consultation with all its confederating members and church elders, by assuming a jurisdiction under the provisions of Article 371A of the Indian Constitution and as empowered by Point No. 8 of the 16 Point Agreement, 1960; and the Nagaland Village and Tribal Council Act 1978, issued a statement to ban all activities and calling for dissolution of the LBCA, and in the place elected an ad-interim panel to reorganise and stream-line the LBCA. The LBCA in turn criticised the Lotha Hoho for its attempt to dissolve the LBCA on the grounds that the LBCA being a registered society its dissolution shall depend on its Constitution, and the LBCA further reported the matter to the District Administration for protection of its interests which again was forwarded to the Commissioner, Nagaland. The ordinance of the Lotha Hoho dissolving the LBCA by invoking the provisions of the Constitution of India got dismissed as null and void by the office of the Commissioner, Nagaland, terming the action as beyond the legal power and authority of the Lotha Hoho.
Making matters more complex, now there is already a two leadership system established within the one organisation infamously known as the LBCA and the interim LBCA (RCC - Reformist Core Committee), each working towards strengthening the interests and legitimacy of their position. Tensions between the members of both the parties continue because of the attempts of both parties to occupy the premises of the LBCA headquarters, popularly known as the Vankosung Mission Centre. In order to prevent violence between the opposing groups and to maintain public peace and tranquillity, the District Magistrate of Wokha has been issuing prohibitory orders under the provisions of Sec. 144 CrPC, whenever there is proposal of any meeting or association by any of the group within the territory of Vankosung Mission Centre.
While the endeavour of the District Administration to maintain peace and tranquillity in Wokha is of utmost importance, the Supreme Court has in a number of cases held that Sec. 144 CrPC cannot be used as a tool to prevent the legitimate expressions of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic right. Prohibition under Sec. 144 CrPC cannot be issued unless there is sufficient material to show immediate apprehension of danger to human life, property, and disturbance of public tranquillity. The words used in the executive orders must be plain and simple projecting every factual situation in order to avoid mistrust towards government functionaries and also to avoid panic and confusion among the general public because such prohibitory order is subject to judicial review. A mere statement that the magistrate is satisfied that there is every possibility for serious breach of peace between the parties as well as public tranquillity is not sufficient to exercise powers under this provision. Where the District Magistrate refused permission to the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) to hold meeting and relaxing of prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC was also refused, the High Court of Calcutta quashed the said order and observed that holding of a meeting could not be totally prohibited, but necessary restrictions could have been imposed as a preventive measure.
A rule of law is cast upon the magistrate to initiate inquiry and also give an opportunity of being heard to the concerned parties whose rights and interests are bound to be affected before such prohibitory orders under Sec. 144 CrPC are issued. It is also incumbent upon the concerned parties to submit a statement in writing to show cause before the Magistrate as to why they have legitimate claims to hold a meeting or association or to have a peaceful possession of a particular property. Upon hearing the parties concerned whose rights will be adversely affected, the magistrate may, by imposing reasonable restrictions for keeping the peace and for good behaviour, allow the possession of a place or a meeting or association to continue. The prohibition provision under Sec. 144 is restrictive in nature; therefore, the magistrate can only order a person to abstain from doing certain act that is preventing another person from doing an act.
With due respect to Lotha Hoho, the enforcement of the provisions of Constitution of India to dissolve LBCA during March 2022, have been excessive and certainly wrong in law because in as much as the Constitutional Law of India is concerned, the execution of such powers are available only to the President of India, and the government agencies in whose authority powers of the executive are delegated. Nevertheless, the goodwill of the Lotha Hoho has been accepted at large by the general public which as a result paved way for the inception of the interim panel (team) commonly known as the pro tem LBCA (RCC) which in time has gained the support of majority of the affiliating churches under LBCA.
The incumbents of the office of the present LBCA have been giving a great deal of efforts for reorganization of the LBCA in the present form, however there are public opinions about diminishing support of a considerable number of the affiliating churches. The untimely passing of the former Executive Secretary of the LBCA has also been considered a loss in as much as the endeavour of rebuilding the LBCA is concerned. Furthermore, the election of the new Executive Secretary of the LBCA has also been widely criticised by the LBCA (RCC) for not following the procedure provided by the constitution of the LBCA.
The office of the Lotha Baptist Churches Association (LBCA) has not been functioning properly ever since the controversy came to existence. By general principle, the ownership of the church is attributed to God, the divine authority, although the possession may be in the hands of His representatives on earth who are the consensus church leaders. No person can claim authority over the church like his own personal belonging or personal property. Through the headquarters of the LBCA, various religious, charitable programmes and educational institutions are under management for common welfare. The LBCA in time has assumed the function of a trust, a depository of wealth and guardian of the Baptist faith, and the LBCA is bound to suffer irreparable harm which can never be compensated in terms of money if the office is kept dysfunctional for an indefinite period.
It is a matter of legitimate expectation that, a motion of confidence be moved by the present incumbents of the LBCA inviting all the members of the LBCA to test whether it enjoys the confidence of its organisation. If the present LBCA leadership wins the confidence of the majority then they have the right to continue to hold the office, otherwise, a leadership who loses the confidence of the house is deemed to no longer serving the purpose of the organisation, hence, resign. It is not in dispute that certain issues are pending before the Courts and other government authorities, but that does not prohibit any person or group to bring about any reconciliation or progressive change in the LBCA. In the present circumstances at Wokha, continued enforcement of prohibitory orders under Sec. 144 CrPC in a mechanical manner by the District Magistrate on mere anticipation of breach of public peace, will in the long run do more harm than good, because the fundamental right to management of religious institutions and freedom of religious worship cannot be continued to be denied to the legitimate parties. Let there be negotiations to resolve the matter, for the issue could have arisen because of ideological differences and not because of other speculative reasons.
The interference into the internal affairs of WTBC by the LBCA is unprecedented and wrong, and even in terms of ‘secular law’ the act is unreasonable and arbitrary for want of jurisdiction. The WTBC has the right to reject the orders of the LBCA, term the backdoor appointments as invalid and reorganise itself in any manner it deem reasonable. The past action of the WTBC suspending names of members who participated in the Pastor’s dedication programme organised by the LBCA is observed as random and unreasonable in as much as opportunity for explanation was not given to them therefore the WTBC may in Christian spirit tender apology and reconsider the decision.
Two leadership systems have been created within the one church but the body of Christ cannot be divided into two at any cost. Both leadership read the same Bible and both pray to the same God – but the prayers of both could not be answered fully, neither a half-answer be given to both. In the Bible, when Paul heard disturbing reports about strife and division seriously threatening the church at Corinth, he warned them that disputes within the church should not be taken to the courts of secular authority which were deemed as ungodly and worldly; instead Paul advised to take it to the Lord’s people for an inner-church legal process. To shame the Christians further, Paul added, “Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers?” It will irreparably offend the Lord if the precious offerings of the church should be utilised to lavishly fund disputes in the secular courts. The authority of God is upon the Lord’s people for building up the church, not for tearing it down; therefore, through negotiations and understanding, the church leaders and elders should work together to restore balance within the church; because “for such a time as this” you may have been born to be called ‘blessed’, for it is said, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God.”
