SIKKIM OBSERVER Saturday   Aug 17-23,  2013    

Assembly seats reserved for BLs, not STs: SIBLAC

BL seats based on 1973 pact: Salman Khurshid

(Left) Bhutia-Lepcha leaders with Governor SD Patil at the Raj Bhawan on Wednesday.

Gangtok, Aug 16: The Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) has reacted strongly against the ruling Sikkim Democratic Front’s bid to erase the distinct identity given by the Constitution to the former kingdom’s indigenous Bhutia-Lepcha community.

Refuting SDF spokesperson Bhim Dahal’s allegation that seats cannot be reserved in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly on the basis of “caste”, SIBLAC convenors Tseten Tashi Bhutia and Chewang Rinzing Lepcha in a press statement said  Dahal’s statement is not only condemnable but also “unconstitutional and illegal”.

According to SIBLAC, the press statement of August 5 had reference to SDF legislators meeting held at Mintokgang, Chief Minister’s official residence, on August 4 in which Chief Minister Pawan Chamling was present.

In its letter to BL and Sangha MLA, SIBLAC said Dahal’s press release stated:

 “there cannot be seat reservation in our country in the name of any caste as per the Constitution of India and therefore BL seats in the state today is by virtue of Bhutia Lepcha being Schedule Tribes (ST) in the state, the detail upon which was discussed in the said meeting”.

BL legislators have been given a week’s time to make their stand clear on the ruling party’s observations on the seat issue.

“We look forward for your response latest by a weeklong time failing which we shall be compelled to initiate actions or remedial measures as may be deemed fit,” the letter to BL MLA said.

It may be recalled that in response to a query from the BJP MP, Balkrishna K. Shukla, on the Assembly seat issue of the Limbus and Tamangs of the State, who were declared STs in 2002, former Union Minister of Law Salman Khurshid (now External Affairs Minister) in the Lok Sabha last year said the 12 seats reserved in the Assembly for the Bhutia-Lepchas were as per the historic Tripartite Agreement of May 8 1973 between the Government of India, the Chogyal of Sikkim and leaders of political parties of Sikkim.

Referring to Assembly seats reserved for the Bhutia-Lepchas, Khurshid said, “…12 seats are reserved for Bhutia-Lepcha not as Scheduled Tribe but as sequel to political agreement in the year 1973 between Government of India, ex-Chogyal of Sikkim and Political Parties of Sikkim.”

   Meanwhile, representatives of several Bhutia-Lepcha organizations such as SIBLAC, Dregoen Jingkyong Tsogchen (All Sikkim Monasteries Association), Monks of Sikkim (MOS), National Sikkimese Bhutia Organisation (NASBO), Bhutia Lepcha Protection Force (BLPF), Concerned Lepchas of Sikkim (CLOS), Save Kabi Longtsok Committee (SKLC) and Affected Citizen of Teesta (ACT) paid a courtesy call to the new Governor Shriniwas Dadasaheb Patil here at the Raj Bhawan on Wednesday.

While welcoming the new Governor members briefed him on numerous issues of the State.

SLP not satisfied with old settlers’ amendment petition

Gangtok, Aug 16: The Sikkim Liberation Party (SLP) has expressed its dissatisfaction over the amendment petition submitted before the Supreme Court recently by old settlers of the State on the income tax issue.

SLP chief Duknath Nepal said the petitioners had informed the apex court that they were forced to make amendments in their petition in view of “non-cooperation” threat my the majority Nepalese community.

“They have said in particular that they have been threatened and if apologies is not tendered to the Nepalese community and writ not withdrawn, then a State wide non-cooperation movement would be initiated,” Nepal said in a press statement.

Nepal alleged that old settlers of the State had no “loyalty” to Sikkim and were not present in the former kingdom when the Sikkim Subject Certificates were issued by the Chogyal in 1961.

“Those who were not present when Sikkim was Sikkim as a separate nation but are desperate to become Sikkimese when Sikkim has become part of India, are traitors and anti-nationals,” Nepal said.

RS panel for IT exemption for pre-1975 old settlers

Gangtok, Aug 16: While a section of the old settlers of Sikkim has approached the Supreme Court on the income tax issue another section led by Prem Goyal has taken the matter to the Rajya Sabha.

The Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions has responded favourably to Goyal’s demand that old settlers in the State, who have been residing in the former kingdom for generations, be given income tax payment exemption as in the case of Lepchas, Bhutias and Sikkimese Nepalese.

In its recent report, the Committee, headed by Bhagat Singh Koshyari, has recommended that Sikkim’s pre-1975 old settlers be treated equally with “Sikkim subjects” in all “socio-economic and political rights” in the “interest of justice, equality and welfare of its citizens”.

The report said the decision of ancestors of 400 families of Sikkim to retain their Indian citizenship when Sikkim Subjects Certificates were issued in 1960s has now placed their descendants in  “disadvantage position”.

Referring to the Finance Act of 2008, the report said the Act provided IT exemption to “Sikkim subjects” while leaving out the old settlers.

The report noted that while 73, 431 individuals who were given Certificate of Identification and Indian citizenship in 1989 have been exempted from the IT purview while the old settlers in the State have been left out and were discriminated.

The report also revealed that the State Government had objected to old settlers’ demand on the IT issue, stating that it was “highly objectionable and unacceptable”. (also see edit on page 2)

Scrap GTA first, Gorkha League tells GJM

Joining JAC conditional: Bharati Tamang

Darjeeling, Aug 16: Fissures appeared barely a day after GJM propped up an eight-party platform for Gorkhaland stir as major constituent All-India Gorkha League walked out demanding that its three conditions be met first, including the scrapping of the Territorial Administration (GTA).

The AIGL had raised three demands at the all party meeting yesterday at which the platform, Gorkhaland Joint Action Committee was formed, AIGL president Bharti Tamang told a press conference here on Saturday.

Bharati Tamang, who took over the party following the murder of her husband and then president Madan Tamang in Darjeeling town on May 21, 2010, said the demands were that the GJM should quit the GTA, all GTA members should resign and there should be speedy justice for Madan Tamang, PTI reported.

"If the GJM leadership shows interest in meeting our demands, we will return to the GJAC," Bharati Tamang said.

The decision was communicated to Enos Das Pradhan, chief of GJAC, she said.

"The existence of GTA and the Gorkhaland movement cannot go together," AIGL General Secretary Pratap Khati said.

"Till GTA is there, we cannot advance our movement to achieve Gorkhaland. GTA has to be repealed," he said.

Following withdrawal of the ABGL, the third largest party after GJM and CPRM (Communist Party of Revolutionary Marxists), leaders of the other smaller parties said they would also raise their own demands at the all-party meeting.

Meanwhile, GJM supreme Bimal Gurung, in a Facebook post, claimed that historically Darjeeling was never a part of Bengal, apparently to counter Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's assertion that West Bengal would not be divided.

"The creation of Gorkhaland is not the partition of Bengal as historically Darjeeling was not a part of Bengal and was leased by the British from the kingdom of Sikkim in 1835," Gurung said.

He said that Kalimpong, which is in Darjeeling district and the Dooars in Jalpaiguri district, were annexed in 1865 from Bhutan.

Editorial

INCOME TAX ISSUE

Live In Peace & Harmony

Despite lapses, wrong thinking and deliberate provocations from certain quarters there is the need to maintain sanity in Sikkim’s political and social circles. Old settlers of Sikkim feel aggrieved that they have been discriminated and not given exemption from payment of income tax by the Centre. Their grievance is that during the Chogyal’s rule and even after the ‘merger’ in 1975 the  three ethnic communities of Sikkim – Lepcha, Bhutia and Nepalese – and the old settlers all came under the purview of income tax laws of the State. Subsequently, while the Centre exempted bonafide Sikkimese possessing genuine Sikkim Subject Certificate from payment of income tax this facility was not extended to the 400 families of old settlers in Sikkim. The old settlers were forced to approach the Supreme Court when the government failed to achieve their desired objectives.

Much the same development took place in 1994 when the income tax issue became a major concern for all social organizations and political parties. In 1994 the withdrawal of income tax exemption given to Sikkim’s minority Bhutia-Lepcha tribals led to the fall of the Bhandari Government. The majority Nepalese, backed by the Bhandari Government and its Lok Sabha MP, opposed IT exemption to the Bhutia-Lepcha tribals if Sikkimese Nepalese were discriminated on the issue. During the Chamling Government the Centre granted IT exemption to the Sikkimese Nepalese. The present controversy over the IT issue should not lead to estranged relations between various sections of the community in Sikkim. Patience, tolerance and mutual concern and respect should prevail over the present situation.

Safeguards for Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas threatened

By KARMA T. PEMPAHISHEY

Empty seats of Bhutia-Lepcha MLAs during a recent meeting of “Save Kabi Longtsok”  at the historic site of Kabi-Lungtsok in North Sikkim.Add caption

Apropos the Statesman (Siliguri 1 August 2013) in reference to “BLPF appeals to people to pressurize MLAs” is a justifiable cause which was long time in coming in consonance of the fact that even the ST - MLA reserved constituency the Bhutia Lepcha ST consist only as a minority population of the electorate. Hence the reserved ST seat does not really beckon the safeguard of the BL (ST) and the seat normally prefers a candidate appealing to the entire population notwithstanding the reservation stricture.

This might be a plausible case in defense of the BL but under a Parliamentary system of democracy as existing in India, there is no ground to challenge nor redress the system. Probably as a result of this difficult situation Mr. Tseten Bhutia is intending to redress the lacuna by pressurising the respective MLAs in BL (ST) constituency as an alternative to the general mandate. Of course there are many means of arm twisting to attract attention directed towards the BL cause. However, in all sincere consideration this is not a final solution to safeguard the BL(ST) interests - social, political, economical and other related issues.

Although the issue deserves sympathetic attention as far as the legal and constitutional rights are concerned perceived to be marginalised by the general interest of the majority population without any quid pro quo by the latter. Therefore, the situation is without any resolution and account of which it is understood the Sikkim BL apex convener is chagrined to perceive any democratic largesse extended to the majority community is considered debilitating to the BL sustenance. No doubt this feature is also true but understandably a fractionalizing experience which the safeguard of the BL is threatened marginally in reality.

So an overall reading of the situation does not leave any concrete realisation to resolve the situation which the BL rightly perceives as a constitutional infringement and therefore attracting legal action and resorting to which might lead to a blind alley. Hence approaching the problem with a direct action to pressurize the elected members by social means at hand may or may not work at all considering the lackadaisical mindset of BL considerations. Anyway a try is worth the deal but frankly speaking it will not contain the situation. Rather at times it might be adverse and counter productive. After all politics in play can resort to any means to reach the end.

Other then the method contemplated i.e. directly pressurizing the elected members by itself is a misnomer for social harmony at any rate. The BL if truly is sincere in executing action towards stabilizing the perceived marginalisation of the BL safeguards, the right plan of action would be to treat the problem constitutionally down the line without impinging on the democratic rights of the majority population. After all in a democratic system, needless to mention every individual inspite of all claims have a right to redress their perception for judicial interpretation and accord relief. In the same light it can be argued the BL can also put up their grievances to the proper authorities to review their anxiety under the present digression from the marginalisation of their constitutional rights to the national forum. However, before addressing it as such it is of utmost importance first to understand the equation under which the BL seats are reserved vis-à-vis the majority population. The basis of the grounds on which the reservations are statutorily deemed requires to be identified to place it on the table with firmness.

This strength can only be derived after understanding the rationale on basis of which the BL assembly seats are reserved. In order to understand this discriminately one has to allude to the UNO observation of criteria’s in determining the difference between 1. Indigenous people and 2. Tribes, which in fact are two sides of the same coin however differentiated by the distinct marks on the overse and the reverse.  Symbolically the overse side is pictured with the important insignee applicable to the origination of the coin. Normally represented by the head of state or nation.

Similarly the difference in definition (UNO) that the indigenous people are the autochthones group or communities existing and inhabiting that part of the country (when encountered, and in relation to the coming and settlement of the invaders, and still existing till such period of time when the invaders having left). This definition excludes the meaning of the indigenous people as distinct from other tribes existing within the same area. This is to understand all scheduled tribes are by definition not necessary the indigenous people who are endowed with inherent fundamental human rights to demand self determination, internal or external whichever applicable. This is the understanding of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People 2008 (UNDRIP). (The writer is author of Roadmap on the Trail to Gorkhaland)

Indian, Chinese troops exchange beer, rasgullas after face-off in Sikkim

New Delhi, Aug 16: Indian and Chinese troops had a face-off in Sikkim earlier this week which, however, ended in a friendly exchange of beer and rasgullas.

The face-off happened near the Tangkar La pass at the height of over 16,000 feet in eastern Sikkim after a Chinese patrol entered into territory claimed by India, sources told PTI here.

The Chinese patrol, which was travelling in two light vehicles, was monitored by the Indian team comprising a young lieutenant and nine jawans there, they said.

The Indian patrol intercepted the Chinese patrol at the Tangkar La pass and after that, they showed banners to each other asking to leave the area and go back into their respective territories.

At the time of parting, the Chinese troops presented cans of Budweiser beer to the Indian patrol while our troops gifted them a pack of rosogollas, they said.