The Nagaland University Teachers’ Association on Thursday urged the government to discuss in the Assembly its claim that “Article 371(A) of the Constitution protects the state from the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019”.
In a representation to chief secretary Temjen Toy, association president Prof. Rosemary Dzuvichu and secretary general Prof. D. Kuolie appealed to the government to deliberate on the claim.
The association said the suggestion from some tribal Hohos that protection under Article 371(A) must be discussed in the Assembly, did not figure in the resolution adopted at the government-convened consultative meeting with political parties, civil society organisations and NGOs at Chumukedima here on January 31.
The NUTA said Article 371(A) may not be able to protect the state once the bill becomes an act, as the protective law under Article 371(A) and inner-line permit for the Nagas will be overruled or become secondary. They said the bill does not contain any provision to safeguard ILP or Article 371(A).
The Nagas will automatically fall within the concept of “Indian national” which the “Naga political history has not demanded till date”, it said. Consequently, the process towards a political solution would be at stake, it added.
The association referred to Union home minister Rajnath Singh’s statement in Parliament that “the bill is for the whole country” and said, “That is where Nagaland stands affected.”
Reiterating the bill is “non-secular”, the association said it would affect the demographic of the Northeast and its indigenous inhabitants.
The association noted that the ILP has many loopholes but demanded its extension to Dimapur, which has been allegedly flooded by illegal migrants.
The Nagaland Gaon Burhas Federation, along with 15 tribal hohos and the public, at a consultative meeting here on Wednesday resolved to take out a public march from the Old MLA Junction to Raj Bhavan in Kohima on Friday and submit two memorandums to President Ram Nath Kovind and Prime Minister Narendra Modi through governor P.B. Acharya. The one to Kovind asked him to withhold his assent to the bill if it is passed in the Rajya Sabha while the memorandum to Modi sought an early settlement of the Naga issue.
