The Longkhum village incident marks a disturbing low in Nagaland’s electoral history. Poll-related violence anywhere, at any time, is indefensible. That it has claimed yet another life in a constituency already known for such incidents makes the tragedy even more troubling. A father has died. A family has been shattered. No election, no political contest, can justify such a loss.
Elections are meant to reflect the will of the people. In Nagaland, however, they are too often reduced to a contest of manipulation, pressure, and malpractice. Everyone knows this reality, yet meaningful reform remains elusive. The system survives on silence and complicity. The events in Koridang expose once again how fragile the foundations of our democratic exercise have become.
Koridang Assembly Constituency has long carried a reputation for notoriety. Violence during elections is not new here. In the last general elections, a life was lost in Chungtia. That such a pattern continues, unchecked, speaks of a deeper malaise. What happened in Longkhum is not an isolated incident. It is part of a recurring failure to confront the truth about how elections are conducted.
With just over 22,000 voters spread across a limited number of villages and localities, Koridang is not an unmanageable constituency. This is a by-election, not a statewide general election. The scale is limited. The risks were known. All polling stations were reportedly identified as critical. Yet, violence was not prevented. This raises serious questions about the effectiveness of law enforcement and administrative preparedness. Meetings and reviews mean little if they do not translate into action on the ground. Reactive control after violence breaks out cannot substitute for preventive measures. Bringing a tense situation under control is one thing, but taking preemptive measures to defuse it before it arises is quite another, and this is where the authorities have miserably failed.
Of course, responsibility does not lie with the authorities alone. This is a collective failure. The government, district authorities, police, faith leaders, civil society organizations, and citizens must all share the burden of accountability. Where was the moral voice that should have guided restraint? Where was the proactive intervention from organizations that claim to represent the people? Statements after the fact cannot undo the damage.
This is no longer just about electoral conduct. It is about the erosion of values. How many more lives must be lost before there is a genuine resolve to act? The challenge is big, but the response must be stronger. There must be a conscious and intentional effort to ensure that such violence does not recur, not only in Koridang but across Nagaland.
Once the by-election is over, even symbolic steps may be worth considering. The name Koridang has, over time, become associated with violence and death. It may be time to consider condemning the name itself, a practice known as Menentok in Ao, and adopting a new one that reflects a renewed collective resolve.
More importantly, there must be honesty. No blame game. Acknowledge the failure. Act decisively. Ensure that the death is not just another statistic but a turning point. Can we do that?