In a decisive move aimed at protecting the constitutional unity and special status of Nagaland, the State Cabinet has opposed any suggestion to place the proposed Frontier Nagaland Territory (FNTA) under a new constitutional article separate from Article 371A, which currently safeguards the unique identity, traditions, and administrative autonomy of the state. Addressing the press after a crucial Cabinet meeting held on Wednesday, Minister for Power and Parliamentary Affairs and government spokesperson K.G. Kenye said the idea of creating a new constitutional provision—reportedly being discussed as Article 371K—was “completely unacceptable.” The minister warned that such a move could severely undermine Nagaland’s territorial and constitutional integrity.
“If a new Article is introduced, it would mean bifurcation from Article 371A and may exclude the new entity from the state’s existing constitutional framework. That is unacceptable,” Kenye stated during the press briefing at Hotel Japfü in Kohima.He confirmed that the state government has decided to send a delegation to New Delhi to seek urgent clarification from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The visit is expected to take place soon after the Independence Day celebrations.Kenye disclosed that although the ongoing talks between the Centre and the Eastern Nagaland Peoples’ Organisation (ENPO) date back to 2010, the state government had been kept largely outside the discussions until recently. It was only in the last year that the dialogue became tripartite, bringing in the State Cabinet alongside ENPO and the MHA.
He further revealed that the Cabinet had only recently received access to many of the vital documents related to the FNTA negotiations. “Neither the Centre nor ENPO had ever publicly stated the intention to create a separate Article. This suggestion came as a surprise and needs immediate clarification,” Kenye said.He emphasized that while the state government is not opposed to granting legislative, administrative, and financial autonomy to the proposed FNTA, any move that disturbs the core constitutional structure under Article 371A is non-negotiable. “All such issues—legislation, finance, judiciary—are minor and negotiable. But the constitutional framework is not,” he stressed.
