Nagaland (GoN) and Government of India (GoI), over intermediating with the company in exploration has raised questions about the sanctity of Article 371- A (1).

Traditionally natural resources such as land and water constituted common property resources. The community ownership ofsuch resources played a vital role in the maintenance of the overall ecosystem. In this respect, traditional customary law served as the highest judicial authority over such areas. On 22 September 2012,the Nagaland State Assembly (NLA) passed The Nagaland Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulations (NPNGR), 2012. It affirms the State sovereign constitutional power as conferred upon by the special provision Article 371- A (1) of the Constitution of India, henceforth the NLA resolves to re-state the customary practice of Nagas to “ownership of land and its resources”, particularly concerning petroleum and natural gas.

Arrival and departure

The Schuppen belt passing the Lotha territory has an estimated 554 million tonnes of Petroleum and Natural Gas. After signing an MoU with the Nagaland government on 1981 extraction began, however, irregularities soon emerged with the overall process.

Oil and natural gas exploration started in Nagaland on 1973, Oil and Natural Gas Company (ONGC) was given Petroleum Exploration License (PEL) by the Ministry of Petroleum. The Schuppen belt passing the Lotha territory has an estimated 554 million tonnes of petroleum and natural gas. After signing an MoU with the Nagaland Government in 1981 extraction began, however, irregularities soon emerged with the overall process. In 1991, the Changpang Land Owners’ Union, which included residents of the two villages where extraction was held, raised concerns over the PEL issued to ONGC, and the dire ignorance of consent of the community, as per the rights of the indigenous people. After much pressure and agitation from Naga Students’ Federation, the State Government withdrew the permission granted to  ONGC and the was work halted in 1994.

The GoI in June 2013 revoked the Expression of Interest issued by the State Government on 18th December 2012 and received on 8th January 2013. In contrary to NPNGR, 2012 proved Article 371 A (1) null. Prima facie, the NLA in exercise of its power of Article 371 A (1), unanimously passed a resolution on the 26th of July 2010. Pertaining to which the Lok Sabha on 10th March 2011, declared that the State of Nagaland has the right to frame rules governing matters relating to petroleum and natural gas in its territory. Clearly, there has been lack of seriousness in building a proper channel of delegation. Withstanding their former claim, the NLA continue to assert their stand to be constitutionally valid.

Contradictions

The argument lies as natural resources comes under Central List of the Seventh Schedule; hence, the Centre has the ultimate right over natural resources. However, Nagaland being a special category State qualifies in this respect to supersede this provision.

These bring light to the tussle of power, which questions the federal structure of India. With special reference to Nagaland under the Sixth Schedule, special status under Article 371 A (1), and clause 7 of the 16 point agreement between the GoI and Naga Peoples’ Convention (NPC). The issue of ownership remains primordial to the people, to which the Constitution of India have given recognition. It is essential to understand the aspirations of the people and give them a sense of belongingness to the resources they own. This also brings into perspective the regional need for development, the land under extraction goes under strict guidelines and appreciation of the need of the community/ State. The spirit of entrepreneurship and local resource mobilization of skilled/ unskilled worker for employment are important determinants, which will be exercised to its ‘optimal capacity’.

It is reasonable to draw three conclusions. First, the issue of debate occurs with the land owners such as in Peren district, the State and the Centre. Second, it is also clear that these three entities have recognized the importance of the community as primal. Third, what remains contradictory is the interpretation that each have given to themselves regarding who owns the ‘community natural resource’. For the land owners at the grassroots level, the emphasis is given to the individual and community to have direct participation in negotiating with the company, since they are the owners. The State of Nagaland thinks it represents the community because it takes the larger consensus of the Tribal Council, representing the different tribes, which in contrary is a political body and does not truly per se qualify as a traditional customary authority according to some observers. The GoI seems to be aloof of the terms community and traditional customary law with regard to natural resources, contrary to the provision clearly mentioned in the Constitution of India Article 371 A (1). The argument lies as natural resources come under the Central List of the Seventh Schedule; hence, the Centre has the ultimate right over natural resources. However, Nagaland being a special category State qualifies in this respect to supersede this provision.  The question then arises as to; what is sacrosanct about the status?

The Constitution of India remains clear in its definition. Dr. S.C. Jamir, Governor of Odisha and the lone surviving signatory of the 16 Point Agreement between GoI and NPC, said that the ”formal agreement” was a “political agreement” and should not be construed as a “mundane” memorandum of understanding. He has stated that natural resources covers all resources above and below the land, petroleum and it’s by- products. Issues about regional security concern some sections. Assam, which is a neighbouring state drills oil, and run refineries, hence, to take it as a bottleneck will be grossly unfair.
 
Conclusion

The need of the region is trust and confidence from all corners. The stakes are high as the prognosticated estimates shows Petroleum and Natural Gas reserves of 600 million tonnes, over seven oil belts across five districts. The recent formation of the North-East Regional Party Front asserts the idea of federalism in a new spirit. To amend the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and devolution of powers to the State except in matters of defence, external relations, currency and external trade, is one among the anxieties ventilating out of such contradictions. It is high time the Centre starts taking this issue seriously with thriftiness, if it wishes to resolve the larger socio- economic problem of the region.

Ruchinilo Kemp