The Mandate
India is among the few developing countries where gender equality and improvement in the status of women are categorically stated to be the central goals of development and social policy. This commitment is buttressed by an explicit Constitutional mandate that reflects a substantive understanding of the various dimensions of freedom and equality for women. The Constitution of India guarantees equality of sexes and in fact grants special considerations to women. Article 14 states that the government shall not deny to any person equality before law or the equal protection of the laws. Article 15 declares that government shall not discriminate against any citizen on the ground of sex. Article 15(3) makes a special provision empowering the State to make affirmative discriminations in favor of women. The Constitution imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen through Article 15 A(e) to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. Article 16 guarantees that no citizen shall be discriminated against in matters of public employment on the grounds of sex. Some years back there were explicit demands to increase women’s political participation. This public movement eventually crystallized in the form of the 73rd Constitution amendment, 1992. Subsequently, Article 243 D(3) of the Indian Constitution enumerates that not less than one third of all the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every panchayat shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to various constituencies in a panchayat. Article 243 D(4) also ensures rotational reservation of at least one third of the total number of offices of chairpersons at all levels of panchayat for women. Recently, the Union cabinet has approved the proposal for enhancing the women reservation in panchayats from ‘not less than one third’ to ‘not less than half’. Similar provisions have also been made for the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). The Women Reservation Bill 2008, seeking reservation of 33% for women in the Parliament and State legislature, as and when it becomes effective will further strengthen women’s political participation. Thus, in India, despite many difficulties, women have now not only found their mooring in work places but are also in the process of becoming an integral part in the exercise of governance.
The Nagaland Scenario
The Government of Nagaland amended the Nagaland Municipal Act (NMA, 2001) in the year 2006 promulgating one-third reservation of all elected seats for women in the urban local bodies (ULBs), meaning the Municipal and Town councils, of Nagaland. This amendment was passed unanimously by the Nagaland State Legislative Assembly in order to fulfill its Constitutional obligation as required by the 74th Constitution amendment of the Indian Parliament. The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, was enacted with the objective of restructuring and empowering the urban local bodies. An important element in this national scheme was to ensure the adequate representation of women. Therefore, the Act INSERT IGNOREed in the Indian Constitution Article 243 T(3). The Article states that ‘not less than one-third of the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every Municipality shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Municipality’. For some reason this particular clause was excluded from the Nagaland Municipal Act when it was first passed by the NLA in 2001 and had to be brought in through an amendment in 2006.
Election on the pattern of the new system was expected to be introduced during the Municipal Council election in Mokokchung town in October, 2008. However, leaders of the 16 wards of Mokokchung town and the four land owner villages decided to boycott the election and demanded that the reservation of women in the Nagaland Municipal Act should be reviewed and amended by the Government of Nagaland. Volunteers of these units prevented candidates from even filing their nomination papers. The election therefore could not be conducted. Again in the year 2009 the tenure of two Municipal Councils and 16 Town Councils had come to an end and elections were due to be conducted. However there was a lot of opposition to the 33% reservation of seats for women from the sitting members of the male-dominated urban local bodies and the Tribal Hohos. The election to the ULBs were eventually deferred as a result of a lack of public consensus and the absence of political will on the part of the State government to enforce the reservation (of course, the alibi provided by the State government for the deferment was the ‘urgency of finding solution to the Naga political problem’). Till date no workable solution has been found to set the democratic process rolling.
The reasons given (through newspaper) by those who are oppose to the implementation of women reservation in Nagaland are quite intriguing. Some have said that unlike other societies, the Naga society has never discriminated the womenfolk and that they are independent and equal with men and so reservation is not necessary. Some have opined that they are not against women but are against the reservation policy for women because such a policy is, according to them, against the ethos of the Naga culture. Some critics have raised questions about the legitimacy of the policy on the ground that it is against the spirit of Article 371(A) of the Constitution of India. Some critics have even gone to the length of demarcating the role of women to ‘family chores’, rebuking them for trying to usurp the rightful place of men in the house of ‘decision making’. Some have also sought divine ordinance to justify their opposition mentioning that God the creator had intended women to play a supporting role to men and that women must be satisfied with that. Some have questioned the practicability of the policy by arguing that in our society there is a lack of experienced and capable women leaders to occupy public offices. Some critics have even audaciously claimed that such a policy is dangerous and detrimental to the well being of our families, cities and towns. The fore mentioned grounds are just some of the many given by those opposed to women reservation. Most of the objections do not deserve to be even considered because they reek of calculated chauvinism and parochialism, attitudes not amendable to reason. Some of the arguments however necessitate discussion as they pertain to certain misunderstanding and ignorance about the status and condition of our society.
The Critique
Firstly, some critics of women reservation, standing on self-created moral plateau, have reasoned that such an action for women is not necessary in the Naga context because in the Naga culture the women-folks have never been discriminated upon. Unlike in the mainstream Indian society and other parts of the world, women have always been given a respectable place in the Naga social set up and so since the ailment is absent, the medicine is not required is their argument. This kind of judgmental conclusion on the part of these critics speaks volume about the attitude of these people towards women. The Naga men must have the courtesy to let the Naga women speak about themselves. The Naga women must be given the freedom to share whether they enjoy respect or have experienced otherwise. Men should not speak for women. Today, the fact that some Naga men is speaking for the Naga women and is actually trying to impose their illusionary opinion glaringly highlights the subjugated position of women in our society. The Naga men must learn to listen to what their women-folks say of their condition and want.
Secondly, some of those who oppose women reservation have opined that they are not against w omen participation in governance as such but that they are just against the idea of reservation of seats for women in the elected bodies. They advocate the principle of election as open competition where women can also freely take part sans reservation. One cannot help but wonder as to what they mean by taking such a position? Are they saying that women should contest against men and prove themselves worthy? Are they implying that it is not right for women to contest against each other? Are they saying that reservation is a practice alien to our way of life? Are they trying to suggest that the Naga men and women are equal and so reservation for women would be discrimination against men? Such posturing is very hypocritical. The open invitation to women to contest is given knowing for sure that in our social set-up it would be very difficult for a woman to compete and win against a man in an election. This is because even though men and women are meant to be equal, in our society they have seldom been allowed to be equal with men especially so when it comes to the realm of tradition, authority and leadership. Women reservation is a threat to this lopsided social equilibrium. These critics want to maintain the existing status quo. This is the reason why they oppose women reservation and this is also precisely the reason why women reservation is required. It must be understood that reservation is a complementary principle to the right to equality as there can be equality of treatment only among equals and not among unequal. Reservation is an internationally accepted measure adopted for the uplift and progress of the marginalized sections of the society. It is a form of affirmative action to upgrade the status of those who due to circumstances are unable to compete with the mainstream. The Indian Constitution provides for reservation in various areas for the SC, ST, OBCs, religious minorities, persons with disabilities etc. This Constitutional privilege has played a major role in the progress of the Naga society. It is a fact that the denizens of Nagaland had benefitted hugely and continue to enjoy special status as a result of the reservation policy. In the light of the positive impact of reservation, we can safely say that women reservation as a State policy will certainly empower and enable the Naga women. It will be the bridge for women to get into and participate in the governance sector, an area from where they have been kept out for a very long time. Reservation will provide women the push required to get over this imposed state of inertia.
Thirdly, the critics of women reservation have also put forward the argument that such a reservation is against Naga culture and since Naga customary laws and practices are protected under Article 371(A) of the Indian Constitution, Nagaland must be granted exemption from this Constitutional demand. This ingeniously created association between women reservation in urban local bodies and Article 371(A) is fallacious. This is simply because the Constitutional requirement for which exemption is sought for does not fall within the purview of Article 371(A). It is a matter of fact that the urban local bodies have never been a part of Naga culture and they have nothing to do with Naga customary law and practice. The municipal and town councils are political institutions created by the Indian Constitution for the purpose of governance across the country. In matters relating to areas protected under the mentioned Article our State has many exemptions. A singular instance of such is the exemption Nagaland enjoys from implementing the policy of women reservation in the panchayats (village councils) which is laid down in Article 243 of Indian Constitution. The particular exemption has been given because the institution of the Naga village council is indigenous and has been a part of Naga culture and practice from time immemorial. However in the case of women reservation in the ULBs, the argument for exemption does not hold water.
A careful study of the various articulations expressed by those opposing women reservation in Nagaland show that the entire opposition actually stem from a particular historical fact of the Naga society. This reason is often not explicitly expressed in public but it is nonetheless very noticeable in the tone and nuance of those who opposed women reservation. And the ‘fact’ is this - the power and authority of governance in the Naga society has always been the prerogative or the privilege of men. Traditionally, women were never allowed to sit in decision-making positions and participate in matters relating to governance of the village. This domain belonged entirely to the men-folk of the village. The corollary reasoning which is put forward on the basis of this social reality is that “this traditional male-dominated system of governance has always been an integral part of the Naga culture”. The Naga society has always been governed by men and this version of polity is a part of the Naga cultural heritage and it must remain so, is the argument of the critics. In this way the association between the idea of governance and culture is established. The association between the two is the ground for those opposing women reservation saying, “what we are doing is to maintain our culture for it is clear enough that the implementation of 33% reservation for women would surely distort the fabric of our culture” (quote). Such statement clearly shows that the ruling class wants to continue with the traditional arrangement which is, according to them, the ‘Naga Culture’. The women reservation policy represents the ‘snatching away’ of what traditionally belongs to man, his birth right. The opposition to women reservation is therefore rooted in the unwillingness of the ‘ruling man’ to allow the adulteration of the ‘Naga cultural practice of governance by men only’. This concept of ‘governance by men only’ is indigenously Naga in origin and practice and hence qualifies for protection under Article 371(A) in respect of political institutions such as the ULBs, is the publicly-unexpressed backroom articulation of the ideologues of the anti women reservation lobby. Even though the ULBs are the creation of the Indian Constitution the demand is that – it should be contextualized and implemented in the ‘Naga style’. These critics are thus voicing out against women reservation by eulogizing on the sanctity of culture. For them culture is the ‘holy grail’, something which cannot be compromised because it represents our past and our ‘being’.
Such dialectic of the critics forces us to raise the following fundamental inquiries: What is culture? What is its source and nature? Is culture an eternal, unchanging phenomenon? Is it an artifact like a painting or sculpture which has been perfected permanently and is to be kept in a state of appreciation, untouched forever? Is culture not a social reality which evolves and changes according to the needs of people? If there is something in the culture of a society which prevents the society from progressing then why should not that ‘something’ be cast away? Should a society continue to live in the past for ‘culture’ sake? Besides the empty rhetoric, legitimate answers to these questions must be provided by the critics to justify their opposition.
Instead of simply following the herd and blindly opposing women reservation on the ground that ‘women in governance’ has never been a part of our culture, we need to ask the question as to why our culture in the past did not allow women to participate in such platforms. We must understand the context of the origin and the reason for its practice in the past. We need to understand as to how this particular kind of social and cultural practice came into being and use. What kind of a situation demanded that? Is that situation prevailing today? If the situation has changed but we are not willing to let go of th is practice which has outlived its usefulness, what is wrong with us? In the past our society was governed by men and this was because of certain historical and social compulsion. Before the coming of modernity our people lived in a constant state of fear and insecurity. Life then was difficult and hard. One had to be physically strong to stand against the odds and to survive. It was a world in which men were in an advantageous position because of their greater physical strength and agility as compared to women. So men naturally assumed the position of leadership in those days and played the role of the protector and defender of his community. Such was the predicament of life which necessitated the evolution of a system of governance dominated by men. However that world no longer exists today. The ‘situation of life’ in the present world is vastly different from that which was during the ‘headhunting’ days. The standards and parameters which governed the world of the ancient have given way to new paradigms. Unlike the past, today the world provides space and opportunities to all to develop and build their lives. Both men and women in the present age have unprecedented freedom to acquire values, proficiency, knowledge, life-skills, wealth and status in order to become useful members of the human society. So in the practical sense, all, irrespective of gender is equally placed when it comes to the question of the possibility of acquiring the requisites necessary to provide leadership in ones’ chosen path of life. The circumstances of life in the ancient days which gave birth to the belief that the potential needed to provide social and political leadership was intrinsically associated with the masculine gender has today become a thing of the past. We do not need a sociologist or an anthropologist to explain this seismic change our society has undergone, we require just common sense. Therefore, because the ‘situation’ which necessitated the practice of ‘exclusion of women from governance’ no longer exists today, the practice must also cease to be. The time has come to liberate our society from this obsolete way of life. This particular cultural practice must be given a decent burial and consigned to the pages of history. It would be sheer foolishness to continue to hold on to something which has become redundant. We must understand that culture is a social reality which needs to evolve, change and grow to continue to be positively relevant.
CONCLUSION
In the context of the categorical Constitutional imperative and the need for our people to move ahead the Government of Nagaland must muster its political will and implement the 33% women reservation at the earliest by conducting the election to the urban local bodies. The State must protect the fundamental rights of the Naga women and not be swayed by voices of the past. The Naga women must not be denied of something which is given to women across the country. If somehow our women are denied their due reservation it would be nothing less than deliberate discrimination against Naga women by the State. In the case of such infringement of fundamental rights, our women might be forced to take to legal recourse for justice.
India is among the few developing countries where gender equality and improvement in the status of women are categorically stated to be the central goals of development and social policy. This commitment is buttressed by an explicit Constitutional mandate that reflects a substantive understanding of the various dimensions of freedom and equality for women. The Constitution of India guarantees equality of sexes and in fact grants special considerations to women. Article 14 states that the government shall not deny to any person equality before law or the equal protection of the laws. Article 15 declares that government shall not discriminate against any citizen on the ground of sex. Article 15(3) makes a special provision empowering the State to make affirmative discriminations in favor of women. The Constitution imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen through Article 15 A(e) to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. Article 16 guarantees that no citizen shall be discriminated against in matters of public employment on the grounds of sex. Some years back there were explicit demands to increase women’s political participation. This public movement eventually crystallized in the form of the 73rd Constitution amendment, 1992. Subsequently, Article 243 D(3) of the Indian Constitution enumerates that not less than one third of all the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every panchayat shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to various constituencies in a panchayat. Article 243 D(4) also ensures rotational reservation of at least one third of the total number of offices of chairpersons at all levels of panchayat for women. Recently, the Union cabinet has approved the proposal for enhancing the women reservation in panchayats from ‘not less than one third’ to ‘not less than half’. Similar provisions have also been made for the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). The Women Reservation Bill 2008, seeking reservation of 33% for women in the Parliament and State legislature, as and when it becomes effective will further strengthen women’s political participation. Thus, in India, despite many difficulties, women have now not only found their mooring in work places but are also in the process of becoming an integral part in the exercise of governance.
The Nagaland Scenario
The Government of Nagaland amended the Nagaland Municipal Act (NMA, 2001) in the year 2006 promulgating one-third reservation of all elected seats for women in the urban local bodies (ULBs), meaning the Municipal and Town councils, of Nagaland. This amendment was passed unanimously by the Nagaland State Legislative Assembly in order to fulfill its Constitutional obligation as required by the 74th Constitution amendment of the Indian Parliament. The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, was enacted with the objective of restructuring and empowering the urban local bodies. An important element in this national scheme was to ensure the adequate representation of women. Therefore, the Act INSERT IGNOREed in the Indian Constitution Article 243 T(3). The Article states that ‘not less than one-third of the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every Municipality shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Municipality’. For some reason this particular clause was excluded from the Nagaland Municipal Act when it was first passed by the NLA in 2001 and had to be brought in through an amendment in 2006.
Election on the pattern of the new system was expected to be introduced during the Municipal Council election in Mokokchung town in October, 2008. However, leaders of the 16 wards of Mokokchung town and the four land owner villages decided to boycott the election and demanded that the reservation of women in the Nagaland Municipal Act should be reviewed and amended by the Government of Nagaland. Volunteers of these units prevented candidates from even filing their nomination papers. The election therefore could not be conducted. Again in the year 2009 the tenure of two Municipal Councils and 16 Town Councils had come to an end and elections were due to be conducted. However there was a lot of opposition to the 33% reservation of seats for women from the sitting members of the male-dominated urban local bodies and the Tribal Hohos. The election to the ULBs were eventually deferred as a result of a lack of public consensus and the absence of political will on the part of the State government to enforce the reservation (of course, the alibi provided by the State government for the deferment was the ‘urgency of finding solution to the Naga political problem’). Till date no workable solution has been found to set the democratic process rolling.
The reasons given (through newspaper) by those who are oppose to the implementation of women reservation in Nagaland are quite intriguing. Some have said that unlike other societies, the Naga society has never discriminated the womenfolk and that they are independent and equal with men and so reservation is not necessary. Some have opined that they are not against women but are against the reservation policy for women because such a policy is, according to them, against the ethos of the Naga culture. Some critics have raised questions about the legitimacy of the policy on the ground that it is against the spirit of Article 371(A) of the Constitution of India. Some critics have even gone to the length of demarcating the role of women to ‘family chores’, rebuking them for trying to usurp the rightful place of men in the house of ‘decision making’. Some have also sought divine ordinance to justify their opposition mentioning that God the creator had intended women to play a supporting role to men and that women must be satisfied with that. Some have questioned the practicability of the policy by arguing that in our society there is a lack of experienced and capable women leaders to occupy public offices. Some critics have even audaciously claimed that such a policy is dangerous and detrimental to the well being of our families, cities and towns. The fore mentioned grounds are just some of the many given by those opposed to women reservation. Most of the objections do not deserve to be even considered because they reek of calculated chauvinism and parochialism, attitudes not amendable to reason. Some of the arguments however necessitate discussion as they pertain to certain misunderstanding and ignorance about the status and condition of our society.
The Critique
Firstly, some critics of women reservation, standing on self-created moral plateau, have reasoned that such an action for women is not necessary in the Naga context because in the Naga culture the women-folks have never been discriminated upon. Unlike in the mainstream Indian society and other parts of the world, women have always been given a respectable place in the Naga social set up and so since the ailment is absent, the medicine is not required is their argument. This kind of judgmental conclusion on the part of these critics speaks volume about the attitude of these people towards women. The Naga men must have the courtesy to let the Naga women speak about themselves. The Naga women must be given the freedom to share whether they enjoy respect or have experienced otherwise. Men should not speak for women. Today, the fact that some Naga men is speaking for the Naga women and is actually trying to impose their illusionary opinion glaringly highlights the subjugated position of women in our society. The Naga men must learn to listen to what their women-folks say of their condition and want.
Secondly, some of those who oppose women reservation have opined that they are not against w omen participation in governance as such but that they are just against the idea of reservation of seats for women in the elected bodies. They advocate the principle of election as open competition where women can also freely take part sans reservation. One cannot help but wonder as to what they mean by taking such a position? Are they saying that women should contest against men and prove themselves worthy? Are they implying that it is not right for women to contest against each other? Are they saying that reservation is a practice alien to our way of life? Are they trying to suggest that the Naga men and women are equal and so reservation for women would be discrimination against men? Such posturing is very hypocritical. The open invitation to women to contest is given knowing for sure that in our social set-up it would be very difficult for a woman to compete and win against a man in an election. This is because even though men and women are meant to be equal, in our society they have seldom been allowed to be equal with men especially so when it comes to the realm of tradition, authority and leadership. Women reservation is a threat to this lopsided social equilibrium. These critics want to maintain the existing status quo. This is the reason why they oppose women reservation and this is also precisely the reason why women reservation is required. It must be understood that reservation is a complementary principle to the right to equality as there can be equality of treatment only among equals and not among unequal. Reservation is an internationally accepted measure adopted for the uplift and progress of the marginalized sections of the society. It is a form of affirmative action to upgrade the status of those who due to circumstances are unable to compete with the mainstream. The Indian Constitution provides for reservation in various areas for the SC, ST, OBCs, religious minorities, persons with disabilities etc. This Constitutional privilege has played a major role in the progress of the Naga society. It is a fact that the denizens of Nagaland had benefitted hugely and continue to enjoy special status as a result of the reservation policy. In the light of the positive impact of reservation, we can safely say that women reservation as a State policy will certainly empower and enable the Naga women. It will be the bridge for women to get into and participate in the governance sector, an area from where they have been kept out for a very long time. Reservation will provide women the push required to get over this imposed state of inertia.
Thirdly, the critics of women reservation have also put forward the argument that such a reservation is against Naga culture and since Naga customary laws and practices are protected under Article 371(A) of the Indian Constitution, Nagaland must be granted exemption from this Constitutional demand. This ingeniously created association between women reservation in urban local bodies and Article 371(A) is fallacious. This is simply because the Constitutional requirement for which exemption is sought for does not fall within the purview of Article 371(A). It is a matter of fact that the urban local bodies have never been a part of Naga culture and they have nothing to do with Naga customary law and practice. The municipal and town councils are political institutions created by the Indian Constitution for the purpose of governance across the country. In matters relating to areas protected under the mentioned Article our State has many exemptions. A singular instance of such is the exemption Nagaland enjoys from implementing the policy of women reservation in the panchayats (village councils) which is laid down in Article 243 of Indian Constitution. The particular exemption has been given because the institution of the Naga village council is indigenous and has been a part of Naga culture and practice from time immemorial. However in the case of women reservation in the ULBs, the argument for exemption does not hold water.
A careful study of the various articulations expressed by those opposing women reservation in Nagaland show that the entire opposition actually stem from a particular historical fact of the Naga society. This reason is often not explicitly expressed in public but it is nonetheless very noticeable in the tone and nuance of those who opposed women reservation. And the ‘fact’ is this - the power and authority of governance in the Naga society has always been the prerogative or the privilege of men. Traditionally, women were never allowed to sit in decision-making positions and participate in matters relating to governance of the village. This domain belonged entirely to the men-folk of the village. The corollary reasoning which is put forward on the basis of this social reality is that “this traditional male-dominated system of governance has always been an integral part of the Naga culture”. The Naga society has always been governed by men and this version of polity is a part of the Naga cultural heritage and it must remain so, is the argument of the critics. In this way the association between the idea of governance and culture is established. The association between the two is the ground for those opposing women reservation saying, “what we are doing is to maintain our culture for it is clear enough that the implementation of 33% reservation for women would surely distort the fabric of our culture” (quote). Such statement clearly shows that the ruling class wants to continue with the traditional arrangement which is, according to them, the ‘Naga Culture’. The women reservation policy represents the ‘snatching away’ of what traditionally belongs to man, his birth right. The opposition to women reservation is therefore rooted in the unwillingness of the ‘ruling man’ to allow the adulteration of the ‘Naga cultural practice of governance by men only’. This concept of ‘governance by men only’ is indigenously Naga in origin and practice and hence qualifies for protection under Article 371(A) in respect of political institutions such as the ULBs, is the publicly-unexpressed backroom articulation of the ideologues of the anti women reservation lobby. Even though the ULBs are the creation of the Indian Constitution the demand is that – it should be contextualized and implemented in the ‘Naga style’. These critics are thus voicing out against women reservation by eulogizing on the sanctity of culture. For them culture is the ‘holy grail’, something which cannot be compromised because it represents our past and our ‘being’.
Such dialectic of the critics forces us to raise the following fundamental inquiries: What is culture? What is its source and nature? Is culture an eternal, unchanging phenomenon? Is it an artifact like a painting or sculpture which has been perfected permanently and is to be kept in a state of appreciation, untouched forever? Is culture not a social reality which evolves and changes according to the needs of people? If there is something in the culture of a society which prevents the society from progressing then why should not that ‘something’ be cast away? Should a society continue to live in the past for ‘culture’ sake? Besides the empty rhetoric, legitimate answers to these questions must be provided by the critics to justify their opposition.
Instead of simply following the herd and blindly opposing women reservation on the ground that ‘women in governance’ has never been a part of our culture, we need to ask the question as to why our culture in the past did not allow women to participate in such platforms. We must understand the context of the origin and the reason for its practice in the past. We need to understand as to how this particular kind of social and cultural practice came into being and use. What kind of a situation demanded that? Is that situation prevailing today? If the situation has changed but we are not willing to let go of th is practice which has outlived its usefulness, what is wrong with us? In the past our society was governed by men and this was because of certain historical and social compulsion. Before the coming of modernity our people lived in a constant state of fear and insecurity. Life then was difficult and hard. One had to be physically strong to stand against the odds and to survive. It was a world in which men were in an advantageous position because of their greater physical strength and agility as compared to women. So men naturally assumed the position of leadership in those days and played the role of the protector and defender of his community. Such was the predicament of life which necessitated the evolution of a system of governance dominated by men. However that world no longer exists today. The ‘situation of life’ in the present world is vastly different from that which was during the ‘headhunting’ days. The standards and parameters which governed the world of the ancient have given way to new paradigms. Unlike the past, today the world provides space and opportunities to all to develop and build their lives. Both men and women in the present age have unprecedented freedom to acquire values, proficiency, knowledge, life-skills, wealth and status in order to become useful members of the human society. So in the practical sense, all, irrespective of gender is equally placed when it comes to the question of the possibility of acquiring the requisites necessary to provide leadership in ones’ chosen path of life. The circumstances of life in the ancient days which gave birth to the belief that the potential needed to provide social and political leadership was intrinsically associated with the masculine gender has today become a thing of the past. We do not need a sociologist or an anthropologist to explain this seismic change our society has undergone, we require just common sense. Therefore, because the ‘situation’ which necessitated the practice of ‘exclusion of women from governance’ no longer exists today, the practice must also cease to be. The time has come to liberate our society from this obsolete way of life. This particular cultural practice must be given a decent burial and consigned to the pages of history. It would be sheer foolishness to continue to hold on to something which has become redundant. We must understand that culture is a social reality which needs to evolve, change and grow to continue to be positively relevant.
CONCLUSION
In the context of the categorical Constitutional imperative and the need for our people to move ahead the Government of Nagaland must muster its political will and implement the 33% women reservation at the earliest by conducting the election to the urban local bodies. The State must protect the fundamental rights of the Naga women and not be swayed by voices of the past. The Naga women must not be denied of something which is given to women across the country. If somehow our women are denied their due reservation it would be nothing less than deliberate discrimination against Naga women by the State. In the case of such infringement of fundamental rights, our women might be forced to take to legal recourse for justice.
