The views shared here is purely personal but with references to the Constitution of India, independent of the slogans and demands of the negotiating groups, on the likely outcome of the on-going peace initiatives where people in general are yet to see the emergence of the true colour of the chicken. Nevertheless, the very fact that various groups are now settled down to the tables for talks for an amicable settlement are positive signs that are most welcome. Peace after-all cannot be fought through the barrel of guns. The final peace accord is speculated to be announced within three months but the expectations for announcement may be extended beyond the expectations. After all, expectations have no time limit.
Besides the above issues that are apparently speculative, there is a dire need for the people to come to grips with same important ground realities that will directly impact the interest and future of the people of Nagaland. Presently we have a number of groups that pursue certain aims and objectives but do not see eye to eye amongst them. Can an accord with one group alone be sufficient to usher in permanent peace and stability in the state or could the present peace initiative could serve as the first step towards a final settlement that may be acceptable to all or does the final settlement visualise the involvement of the interest of all the Nagas or aimed only in targeting a group or a faction. These are million dollar questions that need to be answered.
Much has also been discussed or speculated about the concept of Dual sovereignty. Whereas I have no intention to explain on the concept of Sovereignty, for this brief article, let us have a fresh look at the present constitution of the country that is written, more rigid than flexible wherein the sovereign power rests with the Central Government. This sovereignty is singular, indivisible and absolute in nature and the same power cannot be delegated to a second party. In such a structure as we have, I do not see any ground realities to accommodate any other sovereignty of sorts in the existing system so much so that the concept of shared sovereignty appears to me more of an academic discussion rather than reality.
All States in our country are invested with a certain decree of powers that is autonomous and independent to decide but such powers are not absolute but local in nature that can exercise control only within their own state or jurisdiction but not beyond. All states with such powers are federated into the Union of India where the Parliament stands supreme. Power sharing and relationship between the centre and the state are well defined by law under Union, State and concurrent lists. In such an existing pattern, it may be inconceivable and impractical to accommodate a separate constitution that is parallel or independent to the constitution of India. Regarding a separate Flag, the National Flag represents the unity and the Sovereignty of the country; as such I feel to explore a breathing space in accommodating any other Flags that is equivalent or parallel to the National Flag. These to my humble views are some of the ground realities where I am afraid there may not be any scope for adjustment.
The present Honourable members of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly are the representative of the people of Nagaland. They are duly elected by the people to serve them. In such a critical juncture when some vital decisions are likely to be made for the State, the Legislative Members need not only play the role of cheerleaders from the gallery while someone else is drawing up Service Rules for them. They are in fact voted to power by the people of Nagaland to protect, guide & promote the interest of the people.
