Aheli Moitra
Two time zones mark the discourse on oil, and thus rights, in Nagaland. The first is 1994, and the second 2003.
Just before May 1994, when the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) officially stopped oil exploitation activities in Nagaland, unprecedented drama ensued. By April that year, the Naga Students’ Federation (NSF), under the leadership of Vikheho Swu and NSN (Tsenchumo) Lotha, reached a peak of its opposition to the ONGC for extracting rather than just exploring crude oil and natural gas.
The movement was long and arduous, and various actors played a part. The Naga society, it seemed at the time, stood united for the rights of people to the land and its resources, yet to be negotiated with the Indian Union in some form. Even newspapers rallied for rights, though focusing much on the 16 point agreement.
Once the ONGC left, the scenario remained the same. The state government’s 4th of July (1994) summit on the “issue of natural resources vis-à-vis Article 371 (a) of the Indian Constitution” was boycotted by the regional opposition party (Nagaland People Council- NPC) and the civil society unanimously. Landowners continued to demand a fair “Naga commission”.
A letter to the editor of a newspaper from a citizen summed up the debate well—formulate a viable “Mineral Act” or leave the oil untouched till a Naga solution has been found.
People’s pressure managed to get the ONGC out, but not without manipulation typical of oil corporations everywhere. By 1995, the ONGC had tapped in on the Assam-Nagaland border dispute. They shifted equipment to what is now Borholla, made Assam claim the area as its own, and, allegedly, continued to tap oil from Nagaland’s basin in the Lotha areas.
A stalemate and much internal confusion later, in 2003, a regional party came to power in the state. This is the same party, under the nomenclature of Naga National Democratic Party (NNDP), which had extended the ONGC’s license to carry on “trial production” in 1981. It is the same NPC that, while in opposition, stood up against the ruling Congress (I) against an unfair royalty of Rs. 33.83 Crore paid to the state, accepted on the ground of paying off a dodgy debt. Today, this is the same Naga People’s Front (NPF) under which the Nagaland Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulations, 2012, has come into effect.
The terms of mining in Nagaland are no more adhoc—mining can now be at a larger scale than Changpang. But contrary to the opposition posed in the 1990s, the rights of the Naga people have been negotiated through the Indian constitution. This is a big shift in the Naga attitude towards rights. The biggest objection to the Regulations has come from land owners, from under whose nose the power has been taken and transferred to apex bodies (that do not own land). Opting for a pre-NPF, Congress time discourse, the land owners have asked for a separate deal with any mining company concerned given the contract to “explore and exploit” their land and resources.
Adhoc or organized, there is a long way to go. Nagaland has undergone a bitter experience over oil. So have many indigenous peoples across the globe. As the state of Nagaland, irrespective of political party, argues for “economic foresight”, one is yet to see who negotiates the aspect of rights and justice for the people (of future generations too). For now, by hinging the discourse on the minutiae of economics, and committing them to the oil automatically, the state takes the “option value” of resources away from the people, who are yet ill equipped to make the decision to let oil out of the soil.
