THESIS
2004
Abstract
In 1947, when India declared its independence from British colonial rule, the Naga people inhabiting in the Northeastern frontiers of India demanded the same from India. By the early 1950s, violent armed conflict defined the Indo-Naga relationship. Naga people refused to participate in the first Indian national election in 1952. However, the formation of Nagaland state in 1963 ushered Indian democratic mechanisms like electoral systems and processes of development within the state. But decades of armed conflict have shaped and created different paradigm for the Nagas and the Indian state to view political representation, political mechanisms and most importantly political participation. The Indian state claims its legitimate rights by virtue of territorial sovereignty over Nagaland to i...[
Read more ]
In 1947, when India declared its independence from British colonial rule, the Naga people inhabiting in the Northeastern frontiers of India demanded the same from India. By the early 1950s, violent armed conflict defined the Indo-Naga relationship. Naga people refused to participate in the first Indian national election in 1952. However, the formation of Nagaland state in 1963 ushered Indian democratic mechanisms like electoral systems and processes of development within the state. But decades of armed conflict have shaped and created different paradigm for the Nagas and the Indian state to view political representation, political mechanisms and most importantly political participation. The Indian state claims its legitimate rights by virtue of territorial sovereignty over Nagaland to impose Indian democratic mechanisms system. However, Naga people continue to demand the right to self- determination. While some Nagas participate in Indian state mechanisms as 'survival' tactics, the rest continue to oppose it as 'alien mechanisms' inappropriate to address the demands of the Nagas.
This thesis critically examines the participation of the Naga people within the Republic of India since its independence in 1947. Focusing on aspects of 'participation', I examine how states not only abuse democratic mechanisms like electoral system, but also redefine and interpret democratic processes like 'participation' to restrict and dictate people's participation. I emphasize that there is often a communication gap in the language of rights between the state and the people.
I examine three areas: Naga people's participation in Indian electoral system, developmental initiatives by Indian security forces, and the present Indo-Naga cease-fire negotiation to examine the participatory nature of the Naga people.
Post a Comment