A fresh debate over Naga peoplehood, institutional authority, and representation has emerged following a statement issued by the Global Naga Forum (GNF), which criticised the position of the Nagaland Gaonburah Federation (NGBF) and called for a review of the Gaonburah institution.
The GNF statement comes in response to a recent media release by the NGBF, reported on April 16, in which the Federation had reacted to remarks made by MLA Achumbemo Kikon.
Positioning its response within the broader framework of Naga political identity, the GNF stated that it remains “ideologically and practically committed to the peoplehood of the Nagas,” asserting that the Naga political issue concerns all Nagas across state and international boundaries, and not only those within Nagaland.
In this context, the Forum criticised what it described as a limited political outlook, stating that the NGBF’s position reflects a “narrow vision of Nagas living in mutually exclusionary political entities.” It further argued that such a perspective overlooks the historical and political dimensions of the Naga issue, which it said has been negotiated at the highest levels over time.
The GNF also raised questions regarding the role and authority of the Gaonburah institution, describing it as a legacy of colonial administration that continues to function within the framework of the Indian state. It stated that while Gaonburahs have the right to express opinions, they “cannot claim moral or historical authority to speak for the Naga people,” particularly in the context of the ongoing political issue.
At the same time, the Forum clarified that its position was not a rejection of the contributions made by Gaonburahs, many of whom have served their communities with dedication. However, it called for “introspection and reform,” stating that institutions originating under colonial conditions must be re-examined in light of present realities and aspirations.
The statement also expressed support for Achumbemo Kikon, describing him as a long-time advocate of Naga political and human rights, and maintained that his position does not violate constitutional or legal frameworks.
Further, the GNF pointed to what it described as ambiguities in the roles and functions of Gaonburahs in both rural and urban contexts, particularly in relation to Article 371A and the Nagaland Village and Area Council Act, 1978. It called on the State government to undertake a comprehensive review of the relevant legal provisions to ensure clarity and alignment with current socio-political realities.