Nagaland officially approved women’s reservation, a significant step towards empowering women in the region. This move aims to ensure greater representation and participation of women in decision-making processes. It marks a milestone in the ongoing efforts to promote gender equality and inclusivity in Nagaland.
Nagaland: After a complex and drawn-out legal battle lasting 15 years, the Naga Mothers Association and the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) finally achieved a landmark victory in the Supreme Court (SC) regarding the 33% reservation for women in municipal and town council elections. Recently, the state’s Advocate General announced to the SC that the elections for these bodies will be held by June 2024. This prolonged struggle reflects the difficulties in enforcing Article 243 T (3) of the Indian Constitution, which mandates this reservation. The legal journey began at the level of a single judge in the Guwahati High Court, escalated to a Division Bench, and ultimately reached the apex court, where the constitutional right finally upheld.
The 74th Amendment Act of 1992 mandated reservations in municipalities and town councils. Upon the expiration of their terms, these bodies were to be dissolved, and male representatives elected from wards newly reserved for women were expected to vacate their seats. However, this did not occur as intended, and male members retained their positions for more than a decade.
Read Also: SC Pulls Nagaland, Centre Over Reservation For Women in Local Bodies
The state government firmly maintained that women were not suitable to participate in the governance of local self-governing institutions. Surprisingly, prominent segments of Naga society opposed reservations for women, arguing that it contradicted the state’s customary practices. Even the progressive top leadership of the Nagas, including the Ho-Hos and the underground leadership, appeared indecisive in advancing women’s empowerment. The failure of Nagaland’s enlightened leadership glaringly evident.
The Naga government consistently broke promises made to the High Court and the Supreme Court, pledging to follow the constitutional mandate. As early as 2009, after issuing a notice for fresh elections, they were postponed repeatedly on various grounds. The cabinet overruled the Nagaland Election Commission’s decision to hold elections that year. Consequently, the terms of the municipal and town council members ended in 2010, leading to the councils’ automatic dissolution.
The then Minister of Urban Development expressed that,
“Women’s reservations would create confusion and also a divided house.”
In 2010, the Chief Minister stated that,
“Elections with a 33% reservation for women could not be held due to ‘stiff opposition to the provision for women’s reservation’.”
He subsequently announced that a decision had been made to “postpone the municipal elections for some time.” He also indicated that the decision made after consultation with the tribal Ho-Hos, and assured everyone that the state government committed to holding municipal elections soon. This assurance given in 2010 yet to be fulfilled.
In 2011, a judge from the Guwahati High Court annulled a 2009 cabinet decision that delayed elections. The judge dismissed the argument made by those opposing women’s reservations, who claimed that Article 371-A of the Constitution prohibited such reservations because they conflicted with Nagaland’s customs. At that time, no such prevailing customs were demonstrated, and none have been evidenced to this day. This pretext led to a 15-year postponement of elections. Nagaland, the only state that defied the constitutional provision outlined in Article 243-T, which mandates a 33% reservation for women.
When an additional excuse made, claiming that the situation become critical due to threats of violence from certain tribal organizations, the High Court ruled that ,
“No special, emergent, or unforeseen circumstance had been proved to avoid holding elections.”
Despite the binding order, the state filed an application with the High Court, stating that ,
“The state has received various representations/memorandums from Naga Ho-Hos, Eastern Naga Peoples Organisations, and different tribal organizations. There is a serious apprehension that the law and order situation will be disturbed in light of the grievances expressed by various sections of Naga society.”
Consequently, “in view of the strong resentment and opposition,” the state assembly requested the High Court’s permission to implement the order for elections only after a select committee reviewed the provision for 33% reservation for women.
Read Also: Nagaland Assembly Unanimously Opposes Uniform Civil Code, Seeks Exemption
In 2012, the Nagaland state assembly unexpectedly suspended elections, openly defying a judiciary order. This decision overruled a ruling made by a single judge. The Election Commission (EC) caught off guard by the state’s unilateral move and informed the High Court (HC) that the revised electoral rolls had already been published in February 2012, but the elections suspended due to a cabinet decision. The EC expressed concern that the suspension done without considering the EC’s notifications for holding elections, calling it “a violation of the directive of the Hon’ble Court.” The EC then sought a court order to “resume the election processes.”