Mokokchung, 25 March (MTNews): The National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN-IM) has expressed objection to holding the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) elections in Nagaland on 16 May, the day the Naga Plebiscite was held in 1951.
The NSCN-IM on Saturday stated in a press release that the notification by State Election Commission to conduct ULB election on 16 May, 2023 is an affront to the Naga national sentiment. “Such historic and auspicious day that made the Naga history so unique and revered should not be buried to fulfill the local electoral process,” it said.
It further said that Nagas have history and that it is the defence of Naga history that Naga political struggle started. It also said that it is the recognition of Naga political issue that the 1997 Indo-Naga Ceasefire was signed between the Government of India and National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN) to pave the way for political dialogue. “It takes blood, sweat and tears to keep the political struggle going to defend the political identity as given by God,” it maintained.
“What it takes to give historical importance to 16th May? After the declaration of Naga independence on 14th August, 1947, Naga Plebiscite was held on 16th May, 1951 to reaffirm the sovereign will and aspiration of the Nagas as declared on 14th August, 1947 to live as a free and a sovereign nation as ever. This is an irrevocable solemn vow that defines the Naga people’s political identity as a nation,” the NSCN-IM said.
It may be mentioned here that the Nagaland State Election Commission has on 9 March notified the ‘Election Program’ to conduct the general election to constitute three Municipal Councils and thirty-six Town Councils on 16 May with 33 percent seat reservation for women. However, the notification to hold ULB election in Nagaland has landed in controversy yet again as several civil society organizations are demanding that certain sections of the Nagaland Municipal Act 2001 that infringes on Article 371A be ‘deleted’ and the Act amended before holding the ULB elections while the state government maintains that the contentious clauses of the Act which allegedly infringes on Article 371A has been ‘omitted’ through an amendment.
