In response to the press statement of the anonymous NPF legislator, the Congress takes the pleasure to make its stand clear to the Naga public once and for all.
It was unfortunate that the NPF had decided to make the JLF meeting on 13th December 2012 a big issue by questioning the Congress of its insincerity in finding solution to the Naga political issue. The Congress Legislature Party (CLP) had decided not to attend the said meeting because there was nothing more to discuss. The CLP had made its stand clear on 10th December JLF meeting that all sixty MLAs should resign before the pronouncement of election if the JLF is really serious and sincere for solution before election. The Congress felt that there was no better opportunity to resign than when the Parliament has been in its winter session. The resignation of sixty MLAs could have caused unprecedented pressure on the Parliament in session. Resignation of all sixty MLAs was necessary because that would truly represent peoples’ mandate in its entirety, whereas; resignation of eighteen Congress legislators only would have no bearing because it would not represent the mandate of the entire people of Nagaland. In the journey of JLF, resignation before the pronouncement of election was expected to have been the pan-ultimate step. The DAN legislators had refused to do that. The Congress had done what it was required and expected to do. Without resignation, the JLF’s journey had reached the dead end.
On JLF’s December 10 meeting, the DAN legislators had proposed to adopt a resolution for deferment of election but the Congress had refused. The DAN legislators should make it clear to the public under what section of the Constitution; it can make demand to the Government of India to prevail upon the ECI to defer the election.
“No solution, no election” has no Constitutional validity whereas en-mass resignation of MLAs before the pronouncement of election has. Resignation was a better, stronger and sure option to create opportunity for solution. Demand for deferment of election has no basis to cause constitutional crisis. The DAN legislators had opted for the weaker option. Other than Constitutional crisis, nothing can cause deferment of election. Resignation will cause constitutional crisis that will either bring solution before election or President’s Rule (PR), in other words; deferment of election for solution. Why the NPF is afraid of PR if that is the last option to find solution without election?
“No solution, no election” is a direct call to boycott the election. The Congress is prepared even for that if that will help find solution before the election. The Congress dares the DAN coalition to clearly spell out its stand instead of indulging in rhetoric.
It was a ridiculous proposition that the Congress, to prove its seriousness and sincerity should have prevailed upon the Congress-led UPA government and neighboring Congress-ruled States to expedite the solution. If that was the NPF’s narrow line of thinking; what was the need for the JLF?
NPCC
