LEST WE FORGET: Ram Chandra Poudyal

We need to free Poudyal of the desh bechua tag

 

   History sometimes leaves behind its distortions and it is the writer’s job to correct it. One of such misconceptions that has emerged out of the merger era is that amongst those who ‘sold Sikkim’ was Ram Chandra Poudyal, then a fiery Youth Congress leader and one of the key players in the political upheaval in Sikkim in the early seventies that saw the downfall of the Chogyal, the end of the Namgyal Dynasty – which ruled Sikkim for well over 300 years – and Sikkim’s merger with India in 1975.

   Whenever people talk of this period Poudyal’s name is dragged along with the battisey chor (32 thieves (MLAs) in the Assembly), who are often accused of having sold Sikkim. In fact, only last week Poudyal nearly had a fist fight with a young politician who accused him for being responsible for the huge influx in Sikkim that the merger produced.

   Throughout their political career local politicians, like Poudyal, who played a key role during the merger era in early ’70s, often faced bitter experiences and accusations that they had sold their country to an outside party for their political and personal gains. It is because of this that whenever the expression ‘desh bechua’ (sellers of the country) is mentioned in public speeches or in private conversations those, like Poudyal, who sided or became part of the L.D. Kazi-led Congress Government in the seventies (1974-1979), have been forced to live with a certain amount of guilt even if some of them were not directly responsible for the merger.

   Are they guilty of being labelled as desh bechuas?  Or more importantly, was R.C. Poudyal one of the desh bechuas? Let us look back to this era and see what really took place and judge for ourselves if men like Poudyal should be released from the burden of guilt that history has placed on them.

   The outcome of the elections of the Sikkim Council in early 1973, when the pro-Sikkim, pro-Chogyal party, Sikkim National Party (SNP), won majority of the seats, led to a mass agitation in Sikkim under the leadership of L.D. Kazi and Krishna Chandra Pradhan of the Sikkim National Congress (SNC) and Sikkim Janata Congress (SJC) respectively. The leaders of the two parties, which lost the polls, alleged that the polls were rigged.

   It was during this crucial period that Poudyal, an impetuous Youth Congress leader who was not even 30 when he, along with K.N. Upreti, staged a hunger strike at the Palace lawn in the capital on March 28, 1973. They demanded amongst other things greater democratization of the political system, a written constitution, fundamental rights and ‘one man, one vote.’ For the Indian-backed agitation led by leaders like Kazi, Pradhan and N. B. Khatiwada the hunger strike was a welcome development. It added fuel to the fire and gradually the agitation took the shape of a mass movement, which finally led to the signing of the historic Tripartite Agreement in Gangtok on May 8, 1973.

   The signing of this historic pact between the Chogyal, the Government of India and leaders of three major political parties (SNP, SNC and SJC) led to the holding of another elections to the 32-member Sikkim Assembly in mid-April 1974. The polls were held on the basis of the 1973 Agreement, which gave greater political rights to the majority Nepalese with the fulfilment of the ‘one man, one vote’ demand.  The Kazi-led Sikkim Congress, formed after the merger of the Sikkim National Congress and Sikkim Janata Congress, subsequent to the signing of the May 8th Agreement, won 31 of the 32 seats in the polls alleged to have been heavily rigged. Poudyal was elected to the Assembly for the first time from his home constituency of Lossing Pacheykhani in East Sikkim.

   Though pro-Sikkim forces, mischievously and deliberately dubbed as ‘monarchists’ by pro-India elements and the Indian media, led by nationalists leaders like Nar Bahadur Bhandari, Sherab Palden, Lachen Gomchen Rinpoche, Captain Yongda, Nandu Thapa etc. were of the firm belief that Sikkim was gradually heading towards ultimate merger with India, its protecting power, there were those in the Congress camp men like Pradhan, Poudyal, N. B. Subedi, Upreti and others,  who while demanding ‘full-fledged democracy’ in Sikkim, opposed merger with India. They wanted to retain Sikkim’s separate political identity with the Chogyal as a constitutional head.

   When a controversial resolution seeking Sikkim’s “participation in the political and economic institutions of India” came up for adoption in the Assembly after the polls on May 11, 1974 it was Poudyal and Subedi, MLA, who opposed it while demanding retention of Sikkim’s distinct political identity as a protectorate of India. Poudyal, in fact, wanted a “Prime Minister” and not a “Chief Minister” to head the Sikkim Assembly. The stand taken by him are on record in the Sikkim Assembly proceedings for public scrutiny.

   Dissidents within the Congress led by Poudyal not only opposed the controversial resolution on Sikkim’s participation in India’s political institutions, they also demanded that Sikkim’s new constitution be drafted by the Sikkimese and not by a constitutional expert from India as was being demanded by the Congress party.

  When the resolution came to the Assembly in the form of a Bill (Govt of Sikkim Bill 1974) in June 1974, Poudyal not only opposed it but staged a hunger strike to oppose the Bill with a view to creating mass awareness on what was really happening in Sikkim in the name of ushering in democracy. “The chief minister will be just like the leader of any Indian State under this bill. We were promised a prime minister and told that Sikkim would be linked to India only by a treaty. We are a separate country and our identity must be respected,” Poudyal told visiting Indian journalists. (Ref: Smash and Grab: Annexation of Sikkim by Sunanda K. Dutta-Ray)

   The picture becomes clearer after the passing of the Bill in July 1974, which changed Sikkim’s status from a Protectorate to an Associate State of India. The Associate State status still retained Sikkim’s international status. Though Sikkim moved closer to India the Chogyal was still the constitutional head of the kingdom.

   On March 4, 1975, when the Chogyal returned to Sikkim after attending King Birendra’s coronation in Kathmandu, he was forcefully stopped from entering the country at the India-Sikkim border in Rongpo, East Sikkim, by a group of Congress youths led by Poudyal and others. In the scuffle that took place between the Choygal’s Sikkim Guards and the mob Poudyal’s right hand wrist was allegedly slashed by a khukuri and he had to be hospitalized.

   During his visit to Kathmandu the Chogyal briefed world leaders on India’s attempts to erase Sikkim’s independent status and merge it with India. While a section of the Congress leadership wanted Sikkim’s merger with India there were those who while demanding greater political rights for the majority Nepalese and elected representatives never wanted merger with India. Those within the ruling party who opposed the merger rallied round Poudyal, who was a marked man in the Congress camp. In fact, there was an internal conspiracy within the Congress party to ensure that Poudyal was defeated in the April 1974 Sikkim Assembly elections.

   Under the pretext of giving him proper medical treatment Poudyal was kept in the army hospital in Libing, Gangtok, for some time under strict surveillance and was later (after about a month) taken to Pune in Maharashtra for further treatment by army personnel. Poudyal reveals that after the Crown Prince came to see him at the army hospital and assured him of “working together for the cause of Sikkim and the Sikkimese people” he was taken away in an army vehicle the next day.

   “No one, including myself, knew where I was being taken. Even my family members did not know of my whereabouts,” says Poudyal while recalling what really took place during this crucial period in Sikkim’s history. Being close to the Gyalmo (queen) and with his opposition to the merger Poudyal would certainly have posed problems to the authorities which wanted a smooth takeover. Therefore, he had to be taken away from the scene of action.

  While Poudyal was mischievously whisked off to faraway Pune (then Poona near Bombay) and virtually detained under house arrest it was K.C. Pradhan who took over where Poudyal had left. Sensing that Sikkim was about to be annexed Pradhan initiated a dialogue between the Chogyal and the Kazini, Elisa Maria, wife of the Kazi and the main brain behind the Congress party, to save Sikkim. When this, too, failed mainly because of the treacherous act of a member of the Kazi Cabinet, Pradhan promptly submitted his resignation to the Chogyal and quit Kazi’s Cabinet.

   Pradhan, like Poudyal, knew that they were being outmaneuvered by New Delhi’s men in Sikkim. Pradhan later told reporters that it was not the Sikkim Guards but a man in Sikkim Guards’ uniform, planted by anti-Chogyal elements in Sikkim, who tried to kill Poudyal. He alleged that New Delhi was ready to sacrifice Poudyal to remove the Chogyal, who was the only stumbling block on Sikkim’s takeover. If Poudyal was killed the blame would squarely be placed on the Chogyal, who would then be forced to step down, leading to the end of the monarchy in Sikkim, Pradhan, who passed away a few years back, revealed.

    Swift actions followed the Rongpo incident. Sonam Yongda, a captain of the Sikkim Guards and a Chogyal loyalist, was arrested on April 7, 1975. On April 9, the Sikkim Guards were disarmed and forced to surrender with the help of the Indian army. After placing the Chogyal under house arrest in the Palace the Assembly convened an emergent session on April 10, 1975 and unanimously adopted a resolution abolishing the institution of the Chogyal and declaring Sikkim as a constituent unit of India.

   The adoption of this resolution was accompanied by another resolution in the Assembly to hold a “special poll” on April 14 to seek the people’s mandate on the resolution. Poudyal, then an MLA, was still in Pune when these resolutions were adopted and when the “special poll” was held. Nearly 100 per cent of the voters who voted for the “special polls”, which was later mischievously termed as a “referendum” on the Assembly resolution on abolition of monarchy and Sikkim’s integration with India.

   Poudyal was still in Pune on April 26, 1975, when the Lok Sabha passed the 36th Constitution (Amendment) Bill making Sikkim the 22nd State of India. He was released from the hospital after minor physiotherapy treatment only after Sikkim formally became an Indian State on May 16, 1975.

   That Poudyal later became the Deputy Speaker of the House and eventually a Minister in the Kazi Cabinet is another story. In retrospect, he should have stuck to his principles instead of joining those who sold Sikkim. One would have expected people like Poudyal, Pradhan, and perhaps even Khatiwada and Bhandari at a later stage to lead a movement to ensure that Sikkim remained in the hands of the Sikkimese. But this never happened and our leaders lost their sense of direction and got engrossed in petty politics after the merger.

   In the final analysis, Poudyal’s activities during the merger era may have directly or indirectly led to the end of the Namgyal dynasty and Sikkim’s absorption into the Indian Union. However, if we view what really took place in the right perspective Poudyal’s name cannot and must not be tagged along with the desh bechuas. In fact, facts go to reveal that he had opposed the merger and stood for an independent Sikkim having close and friendly relations with India. When the end was coming and no one could stop it Poudyal wanted a status better than J&K for Sikkim.

   Poudyal, therefore, deserves our thanks and gratitude for all his noble endeavours during the merger era. We also owe an apology to him for all past misunderstandings and humiliations, if any, meted to him and his loved ones. And with all past misconceptions and distortions finally sorted out, one truly hopes that Poudyal, now 65, will walk a free man with his head high above his shoulders and face the future with hope and confidence.

   It was Dr. Paul Tournier who once said, “No one can develop freely in the world and find a full life without feeling understood by at least one person.” Even if there are those whose impression on Poudyal still remains unchanged despite what I have written I hope he finds consolation and freedom and happiness in the fact that I at least have understood him truly and thoroughly.

   People like Ram Chandra Poudyal, who still are capable of performing one last act in their long and checkered political career, are the setting suns of our political life. And in the twilight of their life let them live in peace and harmony with themselves and with those around them.

 

(Ref: Sikkim Observer, 2009)

 

 

 

 

‘ULTIMATELY, PEOPLE POWER WILL TRIUMPH OVER MONEY POWER”

   Issues raised in Jigme N. Kazi’s reply to the Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee’s show cause notice cannot be confined to the Congress party alone. Kazi’s lengthy reply to charges of “anti-party activities” leveled against him touches on several core issues that concern the State’s political elite and the people at large.    

   “Essentially, the fight is between a few good men or women, who represent the hopes and aspirations of the Sikkimese people, and a bunch of opportunists, sometimes masquerading as politicians or social workers, who are backed by those in power,” says Kazi. He, however, adds, “Ultimately, people power will triumph over money power.”

 

    Bhandari and Khurshid

 

Shri Namkha Gyaltsen

President

Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee

Gangtok (Sikkim)                                                   Dated: Sept. 2, 2001

 

Subject: Show Cause Notice

Sir,

   This has reference to your letter No. SPCC/012/01, dated August 19, 2001, regarding a show cause not9ice (copy enclosed – Annexure –1) issued to me by the Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee for my alleged anti-party activities. In this connection my reaction to the allegations is as follows:

1. Allegation 1: Repeated refusal to attend the SPCC meetings:

(a)   As per records maintained by the SPCC I have attended most the party meetings held in Sikkim since I joined the party in November 2000. To verify this fact the register for resolutions/minutes of the SPCC may be examined. In the absence of Shri Somnath Poudyal, General Secretary (Organisation and Administration), in the past several months it is I who have been calling many of the party meetings either verbally or through writing. The party President, The General Secretary and other PCC Executive Committee members are well aware of this fact. Therefore, the allegation that I repeatedly refused to attend party meetings is false, baseless and politically-motivated.

(b)   I did not attend the party meetings held in Gangtok on July 27, 2001 and August 19, 2001. I have genuine reasons for not being able to attend these two meetings:

(i)     July 27 meeting: I had informed the party President that I would not be able to attend the meeting as I was engaged in observing an important puja at home on this day. The pujas were performed by five lamas of the Chorten Monastery of Gangtok. They, along with other members of my family, relatives and workers at my construction site, may be contacted to verify this fact.

(ii)              August 19 meeting: On August 18 night, the party President rang me up and asked me to attend a party meeting in Gangtok on August 19 (Sunday). I told him that I could not attend the meeting as I had already agreed to attend a public meeting of the Sikkim Sangram Parishad at Sangram Bhawan, Gangtok (SSP letter inviting me to attend the meeting enclosed – Annexure II). Since it was a Sunday and a holiday at my Press I could not send my reporters to cover the meeting. I attended the SSP meeting and sat on the press gallery among other journalists. Local journalists, SSP leaders and workers may be contacted to verify this fact. The SSP meeting began at 11 a.m. and lasted till 3 p.m. The SPCC meeting was also called at the same time.

        Allegation 2: Attendance at meetings of other political parties:

 

(i)     I attended two public meetings of the SSP at the Sangrarm Bhawan, Gangtok on May 24, 2001, the 17^th birth anniversary of the party, (SSP letter inviting me to the meeting enclosed – Annexure-III) and August 19, 2001. Invitation letter to me from the SSP to attend these two meetings as a journalist are enclosed. During the two meetings I sat on the press gallery along with other journalists. SSP workers/leaders and journalists may be contacted to verify this fact.

 

       (ii) I do not remember attend any other political party meetings of either the SSP or   

             any other parties as a journalist or as a Congressman after I joined the Congress

             party in November 2000. The charges leveled against me are not specific. They

             are false, baseless and politically-motivated.

       Allegation 3: Misuse of office of the General Secretary of the party by way of publication of newsitems deliberately distorted to lower the prestige of the Congress party and party members:

(i)     The charges are not specific. I edit Sikkim Observer, an English weekly published from Gangtok. The AICC President, along with other party functionaries from Delhi, are on the mailing list of the paper. The Observer has carried a number of newsitems, articles etc. on the Congress party in the past ten months. So far I have not received any complaint from any Congress worker or leader. On the contrary, many people in the State have given due credit to me and the paper for the growing popularity of the party in the State.

(ii) The show cause may be referring to a newsitem in the Observer dated August 11-17, 2001 captioned: “Stalling SSP-Cong merger aiding ‘vested interests” (copy of newsitem enclosed – Annexure – IV). If the party wishes to raise any objection to the said newsitem it should take up the matter with the Editor/Publisher/Printer of the Observer and not with the SPCC General Secretary. Though the Editor/Publisher/Printer of the Observer may also be the SPCC General Secretary it is not correct to penalize the General Secretary on the basis on the newsitem. The action taken against me is an indirect method to impose indirect press censorship and suppress freedom of the Press, an issue the Indian National Congress has always been championing.

   If the Observer report is baseless appropriate action may be initiated against the paper. However, if the report is based on facts and feelings of the people appropriate action should be initiated against the concerned persons who are indulging in anti-party activities and damaging the image of the Congress in the eyes of the people.

I believe the actual reason why the SPCC, during its meeting held in Gangtok on August 19, 2001, decided to suspend me from the party for alleged anti-party activities is because I was perceived as a stumbling block for a few Congress leaders who are bent on placing their personal interests above the interest of the party and the people at large.

   Having replied to the show cause notice it is my bounded duty to place before the party leadership the developments within the Congress party in the past few months and the present political situation in the State in the right perspective.

   Independent observers, including Congress workers, and the people, by and large, are convinced that casteist and communal forces, aided by rampant corruption in the administration, have not only destroyed the age-old peace, harmony and unity of the Sikkimese people, but have also hindered real economic development in the State. If prompt and appropriate action is not taken at the right time by the concerned authorities, which include the Congress party, there is every possibility of this sensitive and strategicallylocated border State heading towards an unchartered destination, which is likely to endanger national unity and integrity.

   I believe that the need of the hour is for all secular and democratic forces to put aside their personal interests and differences and work for the larger and long-term interests of the State and the country as a whole. Despite being the major player in the State’s integration into the mainstream the Indian National Congress has never won a single Assembly elections in Sikkim ever since it became the 22^nd State of the Union in April 1975.  The Congress party managed to form the government in Sikkim through the backdoor on two occasions – in 1981 and 1994.  Had the party formed an alliance with the Opposition Sikkim Sangram Parishad in the October 1999 Assembly elections it would have faired well. Unfortunately, the party did not even win a single seat in the 32-member House. The Congress party got only 4% of the votes polled while the SSP took 44% of the votes and won seven seats. This ought to be a matter of concern for all Congress leaders and workers.

   The fact that the SSP President, Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, wants to merge his party (SSP) with the Congress has been brought to the knowledge of the AICC and the PCC. With the approval of the PCC and with the prior knowledge and consent of the AICC talks were initiated on SSP’s merger with the Congress since January 2001. The PCC President, Shri Namkha Gyaltsen, had written a letter to the AICC President, Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, in January 2001 on this matter (letter enclosed – Annexure-V). While the talks have progressed on the said issue it came to an abrupt end when the PCC Executive Committee at its meeting held in Gangtok on Jly 27, 2001 decided that the merger of the SSP with the Congress be suspended temporarily. The press release of the party meeting on July 27 is enclosed (Annexure – VI).

Circumstances in which the process of the proposed merger of the Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) with the Indian National Congress, which began in December-January this year, and which came to an abrupt and unexpected end, albeit temporarily, on July 27, have formed me to set the records straight and also to place certain vital issues and events on record.

   I do this with utmost sincerity and honesty not only for the interest of the Congress party but also in the larger interest of the State and the country as a whole. I am persuaded and am convinced that the Congress leadership and party workers, within and outside the State, have a right to know how, why and who takes decisions on their behalf on various matters that concern them and the people at large.

   It was under the direction and guidance of the PCC President, Shri Namkha Gylatsen, and with due permission from the AICC and PCC that Shri Balchand Sarda, PCC Treasurer, former MLA and one of the most respected and seniormost Congressmen in Sikkim, and I, PCC General Secretary, became official mediators of the party for talks with the SSP President, Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, on the merger issue. Out main role has been to arrange meetings between the leaders of the two parties for discussion on the said issue.

   Starting from January 2001 we pursued the matter most sincerely giving it the priority that such matter deserves. After holding several meetings with Shri Bhandari – in at least three of these meetings the PCC President was present – we finally received a written document from Shri Bhandari where he put forward several conditions for the proposed merger.

   Out last and perhaps the most important meeting with Shri Bhandari was held in Gangtok on June 20. The PCC President was also present during this meeting. The outcome of this meeting was very fruitful and all of us decided to brief Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar on the merger issue with a view to taking the matter to its logical conclusion during the AICC’s political training camp in Guwahati on July 13-14.

Realising that informal talks on the merger issue had reached a final stage just before our Guwahati meet it was now the right time to take up the matter officially with the PCC as well as the AICC while observing the due process on such matters.

   However, despite these developments we were surprised to note that the matter was not presented to Shri Aiyar in the right perspective. Instead, the party leadership conveyed the impression that it wanted to contest the ensuing Panchayat polls on its own and asked for Shri Aiyar’s views on the matter and funds from the AICC to contest the polls.

   Shri Aiyar clearly told us that before forming any kind of strategy on the panchayat polls the party should first settle whether there is going to be an outright merger with the SSP or just an alliance. Only after this matter is settled the party should formulate its strategy on the ensuing panchayat polls. Shri Aiyar indicated that some of the conditions placed before the party by the SSP President may not be acceptable but he clearly and very categorically stated that matters regarding the merger and panchayat polls should be decided before August 31.

   Despite Shri Aiyar’s clear instruction on the two issues an emergent meeting of the PCC Executive Committee was fixed for July 27. The decision to hold this meeting took place in Guwahati itself. During the July 27 meeting the PCC Executive Committee decided to temporarily close the chapter on the merger issue. The reason given for this abrupt move was that the conditions placed by Shri Bhandari were too “rigid” and, therefore, not acceptable to the party.

   After the Guwahati meet and just before the July 27 PCC meeting PCC President’s comments on the merger issue was carried in a local English weekly: “As of now the merger between the Congress (I) and the Sikkim Sangram Parishad is temporarily suspended” (Weekend Review July 20-26, 2001). Judging by Shri Gyaltsen’s remarks and the development that followed it appears that the decision to put an abrupt end to the proposed SSP-Cong merger was taken even before the PCC meeting on July 27. Is this just and democratic? (copy of newsitem enclosed – Annexure – VII).

In view of the above background I would like to place on record the following points:

1.  Shri Bhandari remains an influential figure in State politics. The proposed merger of the SSP with the INC is a big issue not only for the two parties but for the State as a whole. A few leaders at the top alone cannot and must not be allowed to take decisions either in favour or against the merger. It is perfectly OK to confine the talks among a few selected Congressmen at the initial stage. However, once the preliminary discussion are over all levels of the party’s hierarchy must be taken into confidence while deciding on the said matter. The AICC ought to be the deciding factor on such important matters.

2. The importance of observing the democratic process and involving party workers from the grassroots level on the said issue was emphasized by Shri Aiyar to the PCC President and myself during his visit to the State in June this year. Shri Aiyar very specifically stated that it was not enough for the PCC alone to pass a resolution welcoming Shri Bhandari in to the party. He asked us to call a general body meeting of the party and place the issue before them. This was never done. Shri Aiyar also said a tripartite meeting between the AICC, PCC and SSP should be held in Delhi to sort out contentious issues once the merger process is formally under progress.
3. When the PCC President raised the subject of the ensuing panchayat polls in Sikkim during our brief meeting with Shri Aiyar in Guwahati on July 13, Shri Aiyar very categorically said the party should first decide on the proposed merger issue before raising the subject regarding panchayat polls. He specifically instructed the party leaders to first sort out whether the party wants a complete merger, an alliance or seat adjustment with the SSP for the panchayat polls before August 31 and then come to Delhi for talks. As far as my knowledge goes this very specific direction was not carried out to its logical conclusion. Why?
4. The emergent meeting of the PCC Executive Committee was called on July 27 to discuss on the ensuing panchayat polls and “other party matters”. The panchayat polls was the ‘principal agenda’ for the said meeting as per the calling letter (letter enclosed – Annexure – VIII) for the said meeting. No specific mention was made in the letter that the meeting would discuss the merger issue and yet a very important decision was taken on this issue. Why?
5. A Press release of the party after the July 27 meeting said the conditions put forward by Shri Bhandari for the proposed merger were not acceptable to the AICC as well as the PCC. Apart from Shri Aiyar’s reaction on the conditions the PCC, in my view, has no knowledge about the AICC’s views on the conditions put forward by the SSP President. If the PCC leadership has received the AICC’s views on this it must and should let party workers know about it. Observation of the democratic process demands transparency, openness and accountability at all levels of functioning.
6. Shri Bhandari did place his conditions in writing before the Congress part. The PCC had earlier demanded that if Shri Bhandari is really keen on joining the Congress and merging his party with it he should spell out his conditions in black and white. The SSP President responded positively to this request. That some of his conditions are unacceptable to some of us is a different matter altogether. But did the SPCC (I) President reciprocate Shri Bhandari’s gesture and place before him our reactions and conditions for the proposed merger? No we did not. Instead, we temporarily closed the chapter without even having the courtesy to inform him of our decision, leave alone placing before him our conditions. We, too, have out terms and conditions on matters regarding party organization, elections, issues etc. for the proposed merger. Were we ever given an opportunity to place our views on this issue on record?
7. Democratic process and decency demands that the PCC President formally place before the PC, DCC etc. the demands and conditions put forward by the SSP President. Discussing the conditions placed by Shri Bhandari with a few Congressmen informally is not enough. When the PCC authorizes the PCC President to obtain Shri Bhandari’s conditions for the proposed merger in writing it was expected that copies of the conditions made by him be distributed to party leaders and workers to study and apply their mind and react to it before taking a final decision on the issue.

   Unfortunately, this was never done. Although I had a brief glimpse of the conditions on two occasion, I, though the General Secretary of the party, do not have a copy of it. Shri Bhandari is a controversial figure and each of us will surely react favourably, adversely or neutrally on the proposed merger. However, after a thorough discussion and debate a consensus must be arrived at on the issue in the interest of the party. The PCC’s executive body alone cannot have the final stay on the merger issue. The process that took almost 7 months cannot be put to rest, albeit temporarily, in one single meeting of the Executive Committee of the PCC when a positive note had been struck on the issue. Is the decision on the merger issue taken by the Executive Committee on July 27 in favour of the Congress party or the ruling party? Proper explanation must be given on this issue.

8. The leaders of the Indian National Congress at all levels in the States as well as the Centre are expected to work in the best interest of the party and the country at all times. The manner in which the merger issue has been handles by a section of the PCC leadership recently has created doubts in the minds of the people of the credibility and integrity of the SPCC leadership and the image of the party as a whole in the State. That the above developments have taken place at a time when there are strong allegations and reports that some Congress leaders are hobnobbing with those in power and working against the overall interest of the party are very serious and disturbing developments which calls for a thorough enquiry by the party high command at the earliest.

      It is now almost confirmed that a delegation of the Congress party met the Chief Minister, Shri Pawan Chamling, at his official residence at Mintokgang in the morning of July 18, 2001. While no one can object to Opposition leaders meeting the Chief Minister the fact that such meeting took place at a time when people, including Congress workers, have doubts and are suspicious of the dubious role being placed by certain Congress leaders in the present political situation is highly questionable. Is the Congress high command functioning from Mintokgang (CM’s official residence) or from 24 Akbar Road in New Delhi? While some of us are sincerely and seriously working for the best interest of the party despite being placed under great pressure it is not right, fair and proper if ever there are those among us who are working for casteist, communal and corrupt forces and going against the interest of the party and secular and democratic forces in the State.

   My meeting with the PCC President on August 1 confirmed that at least a dozen Congress members were present at Mintokgang on July 18. The PCC chief has also disclosed to me that they had gone to Mintokgang with his prior knowledge and consent. While the party cannot object to its members meeting the Chief Minister is it advisable to enter the Chief Minister’s residence at this juncture? It is high time that the party leadership at the top intervene and took serious view of the anti-party activities indulged in by rank opportunists and power brokers within the Congress and set the party in the right course before more damage is done to the party.

9. To enable Congress workers to revive the party from the grassroots there is the need to identify real and genuine Congress workers at all levels and allow them to play a more effective and dominant role in the better functioning of the party in the State. To achieve this objective the AICC should immediately send a competent and independent team to thoroughly probe into the activities of the Congress party and some of its leaders. Only after the team submits a report to the AICC should the party high command take necessary action. People power should be mobilized and money power of vested interests should not be allowed to influence the activities of the party in the State.

10. I strongly believe that there is a conspiracy, aided by outside forces, to ensure that the Congress party does not move ahead but remains a stagnant party. Instead of accepting the challenges and forging ahead we have yielded and submitted ourselves to the evil designs of our adversaries. Congressmen like myself have become a victim in the present circumstances. Apart from being suspended from the post of General Secretary I have also been removed from the post of Co-ordinator, Political Training Department of the AICC (enclosed SPCC press release of 19.8.2001 – Annexure – IX).

   Having seen it all I do not have faith and confidence on the present leadership of the party the State. The party high command ought to take a serious view of the situation and take immediate remedial steps to set things right. I seek speedy justice from the party high command on my own behalf, on behalf of the party workers and the Sikkimese people as a whole.

 

Yours faithfully,

     Sd/-

(Jigme N. Kazi)   

 

Copy to: (i) Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, President, AICC

               (ii) Shri Mani Shanker Aiyar, AICC Secretary Incharge of Sikkim and   

                      North-East                  

                (iii) Shri Oscar Fernandes, General Secretary, AICC

                 

                           

 

A MOVEMENT HAS BEGUN 

   I continued with publication of the Observer before, during and after the October 1999 Assembly polls. However, by then I was too engrossed with the basic and fundamental issues that concerned the people and didn’t care much for my professional duties nor the political fortunes or misfortunes of political parties and individual politicians. Sikkim was facing a deep political crisis and I was not prepared to sit on the sideline and let the future slip out of our hands.

   Improper and undemocratic selection of party candidates, imbalances in the selection of ethnic representation and Bhandari’s uncalled-for utterances against certain communities at the fag end of the campaign sealed the fate of the Opposition leading to the SSP’s humiliating defeat in the Assembly polls held on Oct 3. The SSP, which was expected to almost form the government, got only 7 seats, while the rest of the 25 seats went to the SDF. Poll prospects of the parties before selection of candidates favoured the SSP. However, Bhandari dug his own grave by going against the BLs and OBCs at the last minute.

Athup Lepcha

   As compared to the SSP, the SDF’s selection of candidates was not only better but more balanced on ethnic representation. Those who either do not understand or blatantly choose to ignore the intricacies of ethnic balance in Sikkim’s political and administrative set-up have never faired well politically. It was surprising that Bhandari had so blatantly and arrogantly ignored certain basic and fundamental factors in Sikkim politics. He paid dearly for it and his supporters and sympathizers were let down so badly because of his folly. And finally, Bhandari’s autocratic style of functioning and his arrogance, fueled by his sycophants, paved the way for his party’s defeat in the polls.

   At the height of his popularity before the polls Bhandari almost resorted to his old style of functioning. He ignored credible individuals and loyal party workers in preference to rank opportunists and sycophants. Bhandari-watchers and those around him who keenly observed his change of attitude and behaviour, which to a large extent reflected  his egoistic image when he was in power, were convinced that his five-year in the Opposition had not humbled the former ‘dictator.’ Many would have supported Bhandari  had he been a changed man; but since this was not the case they opted for Chamling, who was looked upon as the ‘lesser evil.’

   On October 10, 1999, a week after the polls, the OSU formed its first frontal organization – Sikkim Khukuri-Khorlo Movement (SKKM). Pradhan – now 63 and still going strong – was appointed President of the new body, whose main role and objective was to “spearhead the movement for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese”. The formation of the new body was well timed. It sent a clear message to the people and those in power that the OSU would not only continue with the seat issue but would adopt a more strident method to achieve its objectives.

   After Pradhan was appointed SKKM President by myself as OSU Chairman we hoisted the red and yellow flag of our organization in Gangtok for the first time. Till this point the khukuri (traditional weapon of the Nepalese) and the khorlo (wheel of dharma representing the BLs) remained a mere symbol of the organization. The wheel, which also represented the chakra in the national flag, also reflected the sentiments of ‘other Sikkimese’ in the State. Now, under the changed circumstances, it became the organization’s flag, symbolizing the unity and identity of the Sikkimese people. Formation of the SKKM was seen as a virtual revolt against those who let us down and were bent on coming to power irrespective of the irreparable damage done to the future of Sikkim and the Sikkimese. It not only reflected our commitment to the common cause of all Sikkimese but also our resolve to achieve our objectives.

KC Pradhan

   The Inner Circle of Sikkim (ICS) was first conceived in 1981 during my college days in Bombay. It took shape in the ’80s and surfaced only in 1994 when political instability rocked the State, leading to the abrupt downfall of the 15-year-old Bhandari Government. While the ICS was regarded as the think-tank and top policy-making body of the organization the SKKM became the OSU’s main frontal wing. The OSU remained as the main body of the entire organizational set-up.

   “With the formation of SKKM the movement for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people will assume a new dimension. The SKKM will now take the initiative in ensuring the Sikkimese people’s participation in the democratic movement,” the OSU’s Press statement said on October 10, 1999, a historic day for the organization.

   Adopting different strategies to achieve its objectives, the OSU sought the help and cooperation of “all political and social organizations in Sikkim and all sections of the population in the State.” While stating that “Both the Central and State governments will also be taken into confidence in our sincere and genuine efforts to preserve Sikkim for the future generations of the Sikkimese people,” the OSU said it was “committed to observing peaceful, non-violent and democratic means to achieve its objectives.”

   By openly declaring that we would take everyone into confidence while going about our job we wanted to send a clear message to all concerned, including the State Government, that we were open to suggestions and ready to take help from any quarter. This message and our sincerity in dealing with the issue in the past so many years – sometimes under very difficult and trying circumstances – ought to have cleared all doubt and misunderstanding and opened channels of communication with all concerned parties, including the State Government and the ruling party.

   All parties – if they are really keen on solving our basic political issues – should and could have seized the opportunity, got our support and settled the issue once and for all. Our main objective was to solve the problem and get our demands met; we were not there to take credit for our efforts and our success. Many failed to understand this and this led to doubt, mistrust and misunderstanding. Those looking for personal and political gains on the issue either doubted our motive or refused to join hands with us as they feared being left out in the cold. Our credibility, competence and commitment to the cause made those who profess to also champion the same cause insignificant and insecure. This was indeed the main reason why they failed or deliberately did not cooperate and caused unnecessary obstacles in our fight for our survival. If you yourself are not trustworthy you also fail to trust others. In such a situation ‘common cause’ becomes the ultimate victim.

   Despite the OSU’s pledge that it would not take part in electoral politics in the State unless seats in the Assembly were restored to the Sikkimese, the political establishment had great doubt on us and tried to suppress our movement through devious means. It felt that if we – KC-Jigme combine (KC Pradhan is often referred to as ‘KC’) – succeeded  in our mission it would lead to the eclipse of many politicians and political parties which for a long time have been fooling and misleading the people on the said issue for their vested interests.

Jigme N. Kazi

   One of the top bureaucrats close to Chamling from the BL community tried to arrange secret meetings between Pradhan and the Chief Minister during this period. Why doesn’t Chamling want to meet me or for that matter the entire OSU team? Had Chamling done this he would surely have benefitted a great deal. The precarious situation we were facing made me write the editorial in the Observer in December 1999 under the caption “Sikkim’s Future: Agents of Disunity At Work”: “The move initiated by some senior bureaucrats from the minority Bhutia-Lepcha community on the demand for restoration of Assembly seats in the State is not very encouraging. Their negative attitude towards those who are genuinely involved in the movement for restoration of the democratic rights of the Sikkimese people as per the terms and spirit of Sikkim’s ‘merger’ reflects a colonial mindset and sycophancy that is gradually growing in the State administration. To please their political masters they are going against the hopes and aspirations of the Sikkimese people, who are looking for ways to safeguard their long-term rights and interests in the land of their origin.

   For nearly a decade and half after the ‘merger’ the legitimate rights of the Sikkimese people belonging to the three ethnic communities have been suppressed. Under the leadership of Pawan Chamling the Sikkimese people were successful in ensuring that a climate of fear was removed and the democratic process reinstated. Having fought for restoration of democracy in the State it is now the right and the responsibility of the Sikkimese people to openly and fearlessly come together and march ahead hand-in-hand for their ultimate fight to preserve the distinct identity of Sikkim within the Union.”

   The editorial added: “Any move to browbeat or suppress the Sikkimese people’s movement for a special place in the Indian Union cannot and must not be tolerated. All those who have an evil design and a hidden agenda for Sikkim will surely be exposed even as they consciously or unconsciously reveal their true nature. While adjustments can be made on minor matters there cannot be any compromise on basic issues that concern the Sikkimese people.

   The leadership of the Organization of Sikkimese Unity (OSU), which is spearheading the demand for restoration of all the 32 seat in the Assembly to bonafide Sikkimese belonging to the three ethnic communities, have rightly observed that they will not bow to the diktats of those who are unwilling to fight for the unity and identity of the Sikkimese people.

   What should rightly be brought to the notice of the public is the attempt made by some highly-placed bureaucrats to either buy off or cause a split in the organizations, including OSU, which are hell-bent on preserving Sikkim for the coming generations of the Sikkimese people. One senior officer pointed out that Revenue Order No 1 fully protected the interest of the minority community and it was unwise to demand restoration of Assembly seats for the original Bhutia-Lepchas in the State. Is this acceptable to the BLs? Certainly not. In a small State like Sikkim restoration of the democratic rights through seat reservation is the only weapon to ensure the survival of the Sikkimese against massive influx in the State.

   Another senior officer is making concerted attempts in causing disunity and misunderstanding among the OSU leadership. His attempts to arrange secret meetings with one of the OSU leaders with the powers-that-be is an indication that something is wrong somewhere. These developments must be viewed in the light of the Government’s attempts to crackdown on those who recently organized a 12-hour hunger strike on the seat issue on October 2.”

   The editorial reiterated its stand on the Assembly seat issue: “For the first time in the past twenty five years a serious and genuine attempt is being made by concerned citizens to respect the mandate given by the Sikkimese people on the seat issue. Ever since the abolition of Assembly seats reserved for the Sikkimese people in 1979 to this day the Sikkimese people have voiced their legitimate concern for their future survival in the State. “

   The editorial added: “A handful of politicians and bureaucrats cannot and must not be allowed to suppress the democratic urges of the Sikkimese people for their vested interests. The Sikkimese people will certainly be faced with many challenges in the near future. When a new situation comes into being and when the Sikkimese people are on the crossroad they ought to take note of who their real friends and enemies are. Sometimes wolves are clothed in sheep’s clothing. The time is nearing when the sheep and the goats will be forced to take their rightful place in society. To avoid any embarrassing situation the concerned authorities must fall in line and bow down to the wishes of the people. As the new millennium approaches Sikkim and the Sikkimese people will be given a new opportunity to redefine their place in the world’s largest democracy. What is needed is reconciliation and a more positive attitude to move forward together.”

(Ref: The Lone Warrior: Exiled In My Homeland, Jigme N. Kazi, Hill Media Publications, Gangtok, 2014.)

 

                               

                                  

                                       

 

 

 

INSIDE SIKKIM: IN THE NAME OF ‘DEMOCRACY’

FORWARD:

Inside Sikkim: Against The Tide is a journalist’s record of a heroic attempt to keep the flag of the Fourth Estate flying in a remote and difficult part of the country. Jigme N. Kazi’s trials, tribulations and occasional triumphs afford a remarkable test case for the “Freedom of the Press” in a natural environment setting rather than in the hothouses of the metropolises. At the same time, it brings into focus the carrot-and-stick mechanism to which media practitioners find themselves subjected to in many developing democracies.

   Democracy is a big word in Sikkim – in many ways bigger than in other states of the Indian Union. For, it was in the name of democracy that a protectorate monarchy was abolished and Sikkim absorbed with so much fanfare in 1975. But, did the merger actually bring democracy to Sikkim? If it did, it could not have come in any guise better than the travesty which passes for that great ideal in India. In the event, every ill that plagues the polity of the mother country is somehow exaggerated in Sikkim as if in some burlesque.

   Take corruption. Bureaucrats and politicians get away with greased palms everywhere, but what happens in Sikkim has to be seen to be believed. And if that government governs best which governs least, Sikkim must be the worst governed of places. For its outsized government overshadows everything. Big Brother-like, in a tiny State of some 400,000 souls – comparable to many small towns. In their anxiety to make Sikkim India’s 22nd State, the architects of the merger foisted entire ministries, secretariats, departments, a High Court and every possible trapping of paan-stained babudom on the unlikely setting of serene snow-capped peaks. Naturally, much of the Central funding meant for development was swallowed up by the monster of an unproductive government. As people sought sinecures, native skills such as in woodcraft, weaving and horticulture died out, making dependence on the jealous and unforgiving monster complete.

   With little incentive to be productive the government, instead of being a catalyst for development, became a mere distributor of Central largesse – either as salaries and benefits to supplicant employees or through contracts to the favoured. It did not take long for Sikkim to turn into a   breeding ground par excellence for that pernicious sort of vested interest that both feeds and feed on tyranny.

   A case so bad that the Assembly elections of November 1989 could be brazenly rigged to grab each and every one of the seats and the results claimed as a sign of popularity of leadership entering its third straight term. A lid was swiftly put on public protest. Representatives of the National Press, who witnessed the farce, such as myself, were told to leave in no uncertain terms. Jigme’s attempts to keep his highly credible Sikkim Observer going in the months after such enormity was like the proverbial battle between the elephant and the ant.

   Inside Sikkim: Against The Tide is much more than a journalist’s log. It is a status report on politics in Sikkim half a generation into the merger. It chronicles the role of crusty old Indian civil servants who, long after the departure of the British, got their chance to do a Colonial Blimp on a helpless little principality, complete with the bullying, obfuscation and “fair-play.” The mess they left behind is tangible in the multi-storeyed buildings that crowd each other off the Gangtok hillsides as the excrescence of diverted funds. Also in the abject misery of the people the funds were diverted from – presenting Indian-style ‘development’ at its worst.

   The book appears at a critical juncture in the history of the Indian Union and in the shorter history of Sikkim as a member. At a time when serious questions are being raised on Kashmir’s legally-correct accession to India, the annexation of Sikkim does not even have a fig leaf. China is yet to accord recognition for the merger of this strategic trip of high ridges with which it has a border as also has two other countries. More pressingly Sikkim has become a natural destination for millions of uncategorised Nepalese-speaking people pouring into the North Indian terai, Bhutan and the Assam valley and altering the demographics. What such a large floating group can do to tiny Sikkim with its minuscule population does not require any great feat of imagination.

ternally, Sikkim is in political turmoil whether or not the National Press has the time or space to report it. With Assembly elections only a year away opposition groups are once again braving political repression and custodial atrocities to take their popular protests into the streets – even violently. After New Delhi’s tame acquiescence to the outrageous rigging of the November 1989 Assembly polls, they have been left to their own devices – feeble grassroots workers fighting unabashed perfidy.

   But, forgotten in the games being played out on the far Himalayan slopes are the interests of the indigenous Lepchas, Bhutias, Limbus, Rais and genuine Sikkimese Nepalese, clamouring for what was promised to them on merger – protection from being submerged. More than anything else, Inside Sikkim: Against The Tide is the articulation of that clamour.

 

Ranjit Devraj

Correspondent

United News of India (UNI)

 

(Ref: Inside Sikkim: Against the Tide, Jigme N. Kazi, Hill Media Publications, Gangtok, 1993.)

 

Battle for Article 371F: Struggle And Triumph

The inequalities in representation in the present case are an inheritance and compulsion from the past. Historical considerations have justified a differential treatment: Supreme Court of India, 1993.

  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer solidiers and the sunshine patriots will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph.”

-Thomas Paine

   “…for without victory, there is no survival.”

-          Wintson Churchill

   “And I know that if you carry these words through to the end, it will be a victory…not just for you, but for something that should win, that moves the world…and never wins acknowledgment.”

-          Aryan Rand, Atlas Shrugged

 

     I began the new year on a positive note. I was convinced that 1993 would bring significant changes in my life. I have always been acutely aware of the fact that on completion of every ten years, new avenues and new opportunities seem to gradually unfold. And as I lay on my bed on the first day of January 1993, I was deeply conscious of the fact that the new year would bring something different in my personal and professional life.

   One of the most exciting and meaningful news for me in recent times came on February 10. We had won in the Assembly seat reservation case in the Supreme Court, which was kept pending for 14 years. The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgement on February 10, upheld reservation of 12 seats for the Bhutia-Lepchas (BLs) and one seat for the Sangha in the State Legislative Assembly. The judgement also upheld the validity of the 36^th Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1975, which provided special status to ethnic and religious groups in Sikkim.  This historic judgement, delivered by a five-judge constitution bench on February 10, came as a great surprise to most people although some of us were expecting a verdict on the seat issue any time during that period.

   For me, the Supreme Court verdict was a personal victory. It was my first New Year gift! I felt a deep sense of satisfaction and security and was happy that our efforts to preserve our identity and retain our political rights had not gone waste. After nearly one and half decades of legal wrangle, we had finally triumphed. This was a significant achievement of historical significance.

   A five-judge constitution bench by 3:2 majority judgement upheld the validity of the 36^th Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1975, which provided special provisions in Article 371F of the Constitution to accommodate certain incidents of the evolution of the political institutions of Sikkim. The verdict also upheld the validity of an amendment to the Representation of People Act, 1950/51, reserving 12 seats for the minority ethnic Bhutia-Lepchas and one seat for the Sangha in the State Legislative Assembly.  The majority judgement delivered by the Chief Justice designate, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, on behalf of Justice J.S. Verma and Justice K. Jayachandra Reddy and himself, upheld reservation of 12 seats for the Bhutia-Lepchas and one seat for the Sangha in the State Legislative Assembly.

   Justice S.C. Agarwal, in a separate judgement, agreed with the judgement on the issue of reservation of 12 seats for the BLs, but differed on the issue of one seat for the Sangha. Chief Justice L.M. Sharma delivered a dissenting judgement and observed that reservation of as many as 12 seats for the BLs was disproportionate to the ratio of population of the BLs to the total population of Sikkim. Justice Sharma, who was to retire as Chief Justice the very next day (Feb 11), while striking down the seat reserved for the Sangha as unconstitutional, directed dissolution of the Assembly and called for fresh elections.

   The judgement delivered by Justice Venkatachaliah on petitions filed by Ram Chandra Poudyal and his brother Somnath Poudyal (now in the ruling SSP), while upholding the validity of Article 371F of the Constitution, observed: “The inequalities in representation in the present case are an inheritance and compulsion from the past. Historical considerations have justified a differential treatment.”

    The apex court’s views, as reflected in the historic judgement, regarding Article 371F of the Constitution relating to Sikkim, noted: “Article 371F(f) cannot be said to violate any basic feature of the Constitution such as the democratic principle. From 1975 and onwards, Sikkim has been emerging from a political society and monarchical system into the mainstream of a democratic way of life and an industrial civilisation. The process and pace of this political transformation is necessarily reliant on its institutions of the past. Mere existence of a Constitution, by itself, does not ensure constitutionalism or a constitutional culture. It is the political maturity and traditions of a people that import meaning to a Constitution which otherwise merely embodies political hopes and ideals. The provisions of clause (f) of Article 371F and the consequent changes in the electoral laws were intended to recognize and accommodate the pace of the growth of the political institutions of Sikkim and to make the transition gradual and peaceful and to prevent dominance of one section of the population over another on the basis of ethnic loyalties and identities. These adjustments reflect a political expediencies for the maintenance of social equilibrium. The political and social maturity and of economic development might in course of time enable the people of Sikkim to transcend and submerge these ethnic apprehensions and imbalances and might in future – one hopes sooner – usher in a more egalitarian dispensation. Indeed, the impugned provisions, in their very nature, contemplate and provide for a transitional phase in the political evolution of Sikkim and are hereby essentially transitional in character.”

   The judgement added: “It is true that the reservation of seats of the kind and the extent brought about by the impugned provisions may not, if applied to the existing States of the Union, pass Constitutional muster. We are of the view that the impugned provisions have been found in the wisdom of Parliament necessary in the admission of strategic border State into the Union. The departures are not such as to negate fundamental principles of democracy.”

   Referring to the reservation of 12 seats for the Bhutia-Lepchas, the judgement said: “The degree of proportionality of reservation has to be viewed in the historical development and the rules of apportionment of political power that obtained between the different groups prior to the merger of the territory in India. A parity had been maintained all through. The provisions in the particular situation and the permissible latitudes, cannot be said to be unconstitutional.”

  The judgement further observed: “The provision in the Constitution indicating proportionality of representation is necessarily a broad, general and logical principle but not intended to be express with arithmetical precision. Article 332(3A) and 333 are illustrative instances. The principle of mathematical proportionality of representation is not declared basic requirement in each and every part of the territory of India. Accommodations and adjustments, having regard to the political maturity, awareness and degree of political development in different parts of India, might supply justification for even non-elected Assemblies wholly or in part, in certain parts of the country. The differing degrees of political development and maturity of various parts of the country, may not justify standards based on mathematical accuracy.

   Articles 371A, a special provision in respect of State of Nagaland, 239A and 240 illustrate the permissible areas and degrees of departure. The systematic deficiencies in the plenitude of the doctrine of full and effective representation has not been understood in the constitutional philosophy as derogating from the democratic principle. Indeed, the argument in the case, in the perspective, is really one of violation of the equality principle rather than of the democratic principle. The inequalities in representation in the present case are an inheritance and compulsion from the past. Historical considerations have justified a differential treatment.”

   Regarding reservation of seats for the minority Bhutia-Lepchas in the Assembly, Justice Agarwal in his judgement noted: “The reservation of seats of Bhutias and Lepchas is necessary because they constitute a minority and in the absence of reservation they may not have any representation in the Legislative Assembly. Sikkimese of Nepali origin constitute the majority in Sikkim and on their own electoral strength they can secure representation in the Legislative Assembly against the unreserved seats. Moreover, Sikkimese of Bhutia and Lepcha origin have a distinct culture and tradition which is different from that of Sikkimese of Nepali origin. Keeping this distinction in mind Bhutias and Lepchas have been declared Scheduled Tribes under Article 342 of the Constitution.”

   Justice Agarwal added: “The said declaration has not been questioned before us. The Constitution in Article 342 makes express provision for reservation of seats in the Legislative Assembly of a State for Scheduled Tribes. Such a reservation which is expressly permitted by the Constitution cannot be challenged on the ground of denial of right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution.”

   The Court also upheld the reservation of one seat for the Sangha in the Assembly on similar ground: “The Sangha, the Buddha and the Dharma are the three fundamental postulates and symbols of Buddhism. In that sense they are religious institutions. However, the literature on the history of development of the political institutions of Sikkim adverted to earlier tend to show that the Sangha had played an important role in the political and social life of the Sikkimese people. It had made its own contribution to the Sikkimese culture and political development. There is material to sustain the conclusion that the ‘Sangha’ had long been associated itself closely with the political developments of Sikkim and was inter-woven with the social and political life of its people. In view of this historical association, the provisions in the matter of reservation of a seat for the Sangha recognizes the social and political role of the institution more than its purely religious identity.”

   The judgement further observed: “In the historical setting of Sikkim and its social and political evolution the provision has to be construed really as not invoking the impermissible idea of a separate electorate either. Indeed, the provision bears comparison to Article 333 providing reservation for the Anglo-Indian community. So far as the provision for the Sangha is concerned, it is to be looked at as enabling a nomination but the choice of the nomination being left to the ‘Sangha’ itself. We are conscious that a separate electorate for a religious denomination would be obnoxious to the fundamental principles of our secular Constitution. If a provision is made purely on the basis of religious consideration for election of a member of that religious group on the basis of a separate electorate, that would, indeed, be wholly unconstitutional. But in the case of the Sangha, it is not merely a religious institution. It has been historically a political and social institution in Sikkim and the provisions in regard to the seat reserved admit of being construed as nomination and the Sangha itself being assigned the task of and enabled to indicate the choice of its nominee. The provision can be sustained on this construction.”

Thanking former Chief Justice of India, Justice MN Venkatachaliah , for the Sikkim verdict. 

   My report on the Supreme Court verdict carried in the February 14, 1993, issue of the Statesman, stated: “The verdict was widely welcomed by the people, particularly the tribals, who claimed that even after 13 years of legal and political onslaught against the community, the effort to abolish their reserved seats and take away their political rights had failed.” The feeling that we had at long last successfully defended our rights in the highest court of the land was shared by many people who celebrated the victory in their own quiet way as is customary among the Sikkimese   In invited Anup Deb, Chewang Tobgay and Sonam P. Wangdi, a Sikkimese lawyer who had contributed his share on the seat reservation case, for lunch at home soon after the news of the Supreme Court decision reached Gangtok. It was a quiet affair and all of us were genuinely happy over the outcome of the case. Members of our 1983-84 team, which fought the seat case in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Sikkim Tribal Welfare Association (STWA), an intervening part in the case, were Deb, Chewang and myself. The only person who was not present at my place was Jigdal T. Densapa, the former Home Secretary, who by then had retired from government service. Though officially representing the State Government – one of the respondents in the case – Densapa was very much part of our team.

   It was truly a well-deserved reward for those who had for a long time worked sincerely and painstakingly for the right cause. We knew that it was a victory not only for the Bhutia-Lepchas and the Sangha but for the entire Sikkimese people, whose rights and interests were protected under Article 371F of the Constitution.

   Those of us who were associated with the case were aware of the fact that Poudyal had really not lost anything in the case as he did not ask for reservation of seats for the Sikkimese Nepalese. Many people in Sikkim were under the impression that Poudyal, in his petition, had demanded restoration of Assembly seats reserved for the Sikkimese Nepalese. We had only ably defended ourselves against those who were determined to erase us from the face of the earth. I was convinced through this experience that no matter how long it may take, sincere effort and hard work for a good cause pays in the long run. I was also fully convinced that no power on earth can crush anyone if the people themselves fight and resist all forms of domination and exploitation with all the might at their disposal.

 

(Ref: Inside Sikkim: Against The Tide, Jigme N. Kazi, Hill Media Publications, 1993)