Monday, April 10, 2023

 

“SIKKIM FOR SIKKIMESE”

NO SEAT, NO VOTE

‘Merger’ was conditional

   “It is not right and proper to marginalize the original inhabitants of Sikkim or the three ethnic communities politically and economically through inclusion of other groups within the definition of ‘Sikkimese’….

   While others fought the elections we fought for our people. We were not concerned with who wins or loses in the polls; our main concern was that if the Assembly seats were not restored to us in the near future we would be the ultimate losers and the electoral process would then become a meaningless ritual as the Sikkimese people would have no future to look forward to.”

  The 12-hour hunger strike by Sikkimese representatives at the ‘BL House’, Gangtok, on October 2, 1999. (Left to Right) Tenzing Namgyal, Jigme N Kazi, Nima Lepcha, Pintso Bhutia, KC Pradhan and Gyamsay   Bhutia.   

 “Despite trying circumstances in the last years of the Namgyal Dynasty, Chogyal Palden Thondup Namgyal never gave up. He never surrendered. Why should we despair and yield ourselves to forces that wish to erase us from the face of the earth? The Chogyal lost everything – his kingdom, his power, his flag and finally his own family. And in the last days of his life he was betrayed by his friends, supporters and those whom he trusted and confided in. And yet he struggled on and never gave up for he believed in a cause worth fighting and dying for – a cause much greater than life itself. History is not always written by the conquerors but sometimes by its victims and followers of those whose lives are a testimony of courage, honour, patience and sacrifice.

   For the true Sikkimese, May 16, 1975 heralded the end of an era and perhaps the beginning of a new struggle to preserve ‘Sikkim for Sikkimese’; but, this time, within the bounds of India, a great nation ruled by petty politicians and corrupt bureaucrats. This was an ideal that inspired me and shaped the course of my life ever since I returned to my native land at the end of 1982 after nearly twenty years.

   To aim high, think big and struggle for a worthy cause – for unity, identity and a common destiny for all people in Sikkim – was the agenda that I had set for myself both in my profession and later on in politics. Anything less than that was totally unacceptable to me and not worth the risk, toil and the endless struggle that lasted for more than two decades.

   By the end of 1999 – the last year of the 20th century – I felt a certain sense of restlessness and impatience that I hadn’t experienced before. I needed and wanted to step out of the narrow confines of my profession and free myself to openly and directly place my views to the outside world on certain issues of public interest which were close to my heart and which guided my professional and political outlook for a long, long time.

   Journalism does not allow you to mingle personal feelings and political inclinations with professional duties. The respect that I had for my profession had one disadvantage – it became a wall between me and my people. While freeing me in some ways it also enslaved me. I could not remain in the cage any longer – I needed and wanted to come out and set myself free. I could not and would not allow my precious dream to die in the hands of petty politicians without getting personally and politically involved in the struggle towards achieving my goals.

  Even if I face defeat my effort and struggle to pursue my dream would be worthwhile. I will not feel guilty of playing it safe and shying away in my neat little corner when the ideal thing to do was to come out in the open and take your stand - come what may!  Those who knew me well, respected me, and had great faith and trust in my capacity and commitment had no doubt about the honesty of my heart and the righteousness of my cause that drove me to place my case to the outside world.

   It was US President Theodore Roosevelt who once said: “The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena - whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood...who knows the great enthusiams, the great devotions - and spends himself in a worthy cause - who at best if he wins knows the thrill of high achievement - and if he fails at least fails while daring greatly - so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat.”

   In the autumn of 1999 I found myself in direct confrontation with the political establishment on issues that were close to my heart for a long time. You either take a stand and live out your dream or just talk about it, write about it but actually do nothing about it and spend the rest of your days regretting for not having spoken up and making your stand clear to the whole wide world. The fact is you are what you do and not what you want to do. The road to hell is certainly paved with good intentions. Our leaders who preach and do not practise should know where we are heading.

   In mid-September 1999, I, as the Chairman of the Organisation of Sikkimese Unity (OSU), supported a call for boycotting the ensuing Assembly elections in the State, scheduled for October 3, 1999. Though I had written about it earlier we actually did not make any plan to take such a radical step on the Assembly seat reservation issue. It just happened – quite spontaneously and to my great delight! The boycott call given by the Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) – the apex body of the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas in the State – was in reaction to the betrayal of people’s trust by the combined political leadership of the State and the Centre on the Assembly seat issue.

   The 1999 Assembly polls was the fifth Assembly elections in Sikkim since the arbitrary, undemocratic, unjust and abrupt abolition of Assembly seats reserved for the three ethnic communities in 1979. Not only were the political parties in the State fooling the people on the seat issue the Centre also refused to respond favourably and timely on the demand for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people as per assurances given to them during the merger, which are reflected in the historic Tripartite Agreement of May 8, 1973 and Article 371F of the Constitution.

   The boycott call on the Assembly and Lok Sabha polls was given on September 12, 1999 when the SIBLAC held an impressive rally in the State capital. Former General Secretary of Denzong Yargay Chogpa, Tashi Fonpo – a Bhutia – and former President of NEBULA (an organization for Nepali, Bhutia and Lepcha unity) – Nima Lepcha – were elected ad-hoc convenors of the SIBLAC before the rally.

   The SIBLAC also called for a one-day token hunger strike on October 2, a day before the polling date which was also a public holiday in India to celebrate the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi, widely revered as the ‘Father of the Nation.’ The decision to hold the rally, boycott the polls and stage a one-day hunger strike was decided by both the SIBLAC and OSU although the apex committee of the Bhutia-Lepchas, by virtue of its influence and popularity among the minority community, played a leading role in the given situation.

   While demanding restoration of their political rights as per the historic May 8, 1973 Tripartite Agreement and Article 371F of the Constitution, the newly-formed body also expressed its resentment against political parties such as the ruling SDF and opposition Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) for fielding non-Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas (BLs) from the 12 reserved seats meant for ‘Sikkimese’ BLs. The SIBLAC appealed to all BL candidates – intending to contest the ensuing polls – to boycott the polls to register their protest. It also appealed to the Sikkimese Nepalese to support its demand on restoration of their political rights.

   Apart from the OSU, prominent among the BL and tribal organizations, which participated in the rally calling for poll boycott, were Lho-Mon Chodrul, Sikkimese Unity Joint Action Committee, Sikkim Tribal Women Welfare Association, Sikkim Lepcha Association and Denzong Gyalrab Sungkyab Tsodyo.

   The ‘Newar Guthi’, the premier social organization of the Newar community in the State, was the first Nepali organization to support the SIBLAC’s demand on seat reservation in the Assembly. The Newar Guthi President and former chief secretary of Sikkim, Keshab Chandra Pradhan, while expressing his appreciation and support for the stand taken by the SIBLAC, urged the minority community to demand inclusion of Sikkimese Nepalese in the list of Scheduled Tribes in the State. In a letter dated September 16, 1999 to the SIBLAC, Pradhan said if this demand was met it would not only lead to declaration of Sikkim as a ‘Tribal State’ but seats in the Assembly would also be restored to the Sikkimese Nepalese. The former chief secretary said the Newar Guthi “is consistent of the view that the provision of Article 371F, which imparts distinct identity to three ethnic communities in the State, is being gradually diluted during the last twenty years.”

   The Newar Guthi President emphasized the need “to reweave the fine Sikkimese fabric and bring about a trust, amity and goodwill among sections of the community so vital in this sensitive border State. This was in fact the basic spirit and objective behind the Article 371F when it was initially framed.”

   Supporting the SIBLAC’s call for poll boycott, the OSU on September 15, 1999, made a public appeal demanding “withdrawal of nomination papers filed by bonafide Sikkimese and other candidates who are contesting the coming elections on October 3.” The OSU’s Press statement further added: “Politicians and political parties have been given 20 years to restore the political rights of the Sikkimese people.  They have failed miserably. They should now not be given another chance to fool the people. They should take a break and leave it to the people to decide their future course of action on the seat issue.”

   The sudden revolt amongst the minority BLs and their decision to boycott the polls was prompted by the SSP and SDF’s decision to field Sherpa candidates from Rakdong-Tintek constituency in East Sikkim, which is one of the 12 Assembly constituencies reserved for ‘Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas’. The Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Tribes Order of 1978 includes Sherpas, traditionally regarded as belonging to the Nepali community, within the definition of ‘Bhutia’ in Sikkim. The Representation of People Act 1980, while referring to the 1978 Scheduled Tribes Order, permits Sherpas and other scheduled tribes in Sikkim, listed in the ’78 Order, to contest from the 12 reserved seats meant for ‘Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas.’ This is because the new entrants to the ST list in the State fall within the definition of ‘Bhutia’ in the 1978 Order.

   The clubbing of 8 communities such as Chumbipa, Dopthapa, Dukpa, Kagaty, Sherpa, Tibetan, Tromopa and Yolmo within the definition of ‘Sikkimese Bhutia’ has been opposed by the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas, who are against further dilution of their original identity and erosion of their political rights. It may be pointed out that the BLs are not against the eight communities being referred to as ‘Bhutia’ as elsewhere in the Himalayan region some of these communities are clubbed - and rightly so - under the broader category of ‘Bhutia’.

   The objection raised by Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas is that these communities cannot fall under the traditional definition of ‘Sikkimese Bhutia’ – the emphasis is on the word ‘Sikkimese’ and not ‘Bhutia.’ For instance, many people in the region, particularly the Nepalese, refer to Tibetans and Sikkimese Bhutias as ‘Bho-te’. Sometimes the Tibetans from Tibet are referred to as ‘Chin-Bhote’ and Bhutias from Sikkim as ‘Sikkimey Bhote’, meaning Bhutias from China (Tibet) and Bhutias from Sikkim respectively. Hence, the emphasis on the above context is on one’s nationality, territory and origin and not religion, language or community.

   The same argument may be brought forward while defending the unique and distinct identity of the ‘Sikkimese Nepalese.’ Sometimes the expression ‘Nepali of Sikkimese origin’ is used to distinguish between ‘Indian Nepalese’, ‘Sikkimese Nepalese’ and Nepalese from Nepal. It must be borne in mind that one of the basic criteria for grant of citizenship is one’s origin. Therefore, in both cases it is not right and proper to marginalize the original inhabitants of Sikkim or the three ethnic communities politically and economically through inclusion of other groups within the definition of ‘Sikkimese’.

   The Sikkimese people have been very generous, open and broadminded in dealing with non-Sikkimese residing in the State. What they expect in return is to view the present situation in a more positive way and display some amount of care and concern towards the growing feeling of insecurity and apprehension amongst bonafide Sikkimese for their very survival in the land of their origin. The Sikkimese people do not want to become refugees in their own homeland.  In every country or continent governments enact laws and frame rules to protect their own citizens. Why should the Sikkimese people be expected to always accommodate each and every individual who come to Sikkim and in the process risk losing their own rights, interests and identity.

   Open revolt broke out within the SSP when the Bhutia-Lepcha leadership in the party challenged Bhandari on the choice of BL candidates for the October Assembly elections. Bhandari’s decision to give party ticket to former Health Minister O.T. Bhutia from the Rumtek constitutency (reserved for BLs) in East Sikkim led to the resignation of three prominent BL leaders – Nima Lepcha, R.W. Tenzing and Sonam Lachungpa – from the SSP. What made matters worse was Bhandari’s renomination of the sitting SSP MLA, Mingma Sherpa, from Rakdong-Tintek constituency in East Sikkim, which was reserved for the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas. 

   Former minister and BL heavyweight Sonam Tshering, who was expecting the SSP ticket from his home constituency of Rakdong-Tintek, was ditched at the last moment and this deeply hurt BL sentiments. The BLs expected Bhandari to seize the opportunity and honour his commitment on the Assembly seat issue but they felt let down again. Till the nomination of party candidates the SSP was doing extremely well in its poll campaign. Bhandari himself was pretty certain that he would make a comeback.

   The fact that the SSP chose only two Lepcha candidates from the 12 reserved seats of the BLs made matters worse. The Bhutias, too, felt let down as Bhandari selected only lightweights who were loyal to him. Gradually, a similar pattern also began to emerge in the choice of BL candidates in the ruling party. There, too, BL stalwarts were ignored or eliminated from contesting the polls through devious means.

   My editorial in the Observer (Sept 25-29, 1999) reflected the mood within the minority community: “Not only were the Lepchas thoroughly disgusted with the discriminatory way in which the SSP leadership distributed party tickets, even the Bhutias, who had a major share, were disillusioned. The SDF was expected to capitalize on Bhandari’s failure but when it, too, fielded a Sherpa candidate from Rakdong-Tintek, doubts and apprehension among the BLs surfaced. Furthermore, fielding of 4 Sherpa candidates from Ralong, where SDF stalwart, D.D. Bhutia, is contesting also sent conflicting signals to the people.”

   I reiterated the importance of the political leadership in the State to allot party tickets to bonafide Sikkimese from the three ethnic communities to contest from the 32 seats in the Assembly. If we genuinely and sincerely believe in our declared policy on the Assembly seat issue then it should be reflected in the choice of our candidates. Until the Assembly seat issue is resolved to our satisfaction major political parties, which demand restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people as per Article 371F of the Constitution, must field bonafide Sikkimese BLs from the 13 seats, including the lone reserved seat of the Sangha, and bonafide Sikkimese Nepalese from the 17 general seats and the 2 seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes in the State.

   Any deviation from this stand in the name of political expediency would be harmful for preservation of Sikkimese unity, identity and communal harmony. The need to view the October 1999 Assembly polls from this perspective was emphasized in the OSU’s appeal on August 26, 1999, when the entire State observed the annual Pang Lhabsol festival, worship of Khangchendzonga, the Guardian Deity of Sikkim:

   “Two decades and six years back the Sikkimese people signed a historic pact on May 8, 1973. Leaders of three major political parties, representing the three ethnic communities of Sikkim – Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese – signed the Tripartite Agreement on May 8, 1973. The signing of this historic Agreement, which reflected the will of the Sikkimese people, was witnessed by the Chogyal of Sikkim and representatives of the Government of India, who were also signatories to this accord. The 1973 Agreement fully protected the political rights of the bonafide Sikkimese people. The Government of Sikkim Act 1974 and Article 371F of the Constitution, which provide special status to Sikkim, reflect the spirit of the May 8 Agreement and the Kabi-Longtsok pact.

   On this historic day of Pang Lhabsol (August 26, 1999), being observed as Sikkimese Unity Day, let us renew our pledge to foster peace, unity and harmony. Seven centuries back in the latter half of the 13th century our ancestors swore eternal blood-brotherhood pact on this day. The Guardian Deities of Sikkim and the Sikkimese people, who belong to the three ethnic communities, were witnesses to this historic oath-taking ceremony”.

   The appeal added: “This treaty of peace, unity and harmony among the Sikkimese people remained intact over the centuries till two and half decades back when the Kingdom of Sikkim became a part of the Indian Union in 1975. As we enter the next millennium let us not only look back to where we have come from but let us look forward and renew our pledge for a common destiny.

   There can be no better way to preserve our unity and identity without the fulfillment of our demand for restoration of our political rights which were taken away prior to the first elections after the merger. The Sikkimese people have the right to preserve their distinct identity within the framework of the Constitution as enshrined in Article 371F.”

   I placed on record that since the Assembly seat issue had the support of the people it cannot be ignored so easily: “Restoration of the Assembly seat reservation of the three ethnic communities in the State have been raised by the combined political leadership in the State in the past two decades. In the four consecutive Assembly elections the Assembly seat issue has been a major political issue of all major political parties in Sikkim. In this election, too, the seat reservation issue continues to be a major political issue. But despite having given top priority on the issue by successive state governments the Centre has failed to concede to this long-pending demand of the Sikkimese people. Inspite of the Centre’s delay in meeting the just demand of the people there is the need for us to work unitedly to achieve our common objective for restoration of our political rights.”

   The need for the political leadership in the State to genuinely and sincerely respect the sentiments of the people and implement its policies on the seat issue, pending the final resolution of the demand, was also stressed: “Pending the disposal of the seat reservation demand it is the political leadership in Sikkim which must respect the sentiments of the people on the issue. Those who genuinely believe in the fight for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people ought to field bonafide Sikkimese candidates in the 32 Assembly constituencies and the lone Lok Sabha seat.”

   I reiterated: “It is not too late to take a principled stand on the basic political rights of the people. Let us not trample upon the sacred rights of the people in our blind pursuit for power. There is no better way to convince the Centre and the people of Sikkim of our genuineness on the seat issue than rigidly implementing what we have in mind on this vital issue in the coming elections. The time has come for each one us to make our stand loud and clear on the issue. The allotment of seats to various candidates by the political leadership in the State will be taken as an outward indication of our inner conviction. In the process each individual politician and their parties stand to gain or lose from the stand they have taken.”

   Was it only me who was taking the seat issue so seriously? I begin to think over this and wondered without pausing for an answer. In June 1999, four months before the Assembly polls, I highlighted the need to take radical steps on the seat issue if it still remained unresolved. Captioned ‘No Seat, No Vote’, the Observer’s editorial, dated June 5-11, 1999, stated:

   “Mere reiteration of the seat issue demand on special occasions becomes only a symbolic ritual which our politicians are good at. Lack of concrete strategy to meet the demand reflects the political will of the political establishment…That the abolition of the basic political rights of the Sikkimese took place four years after the controversial ‘merger’ suggests that New Delhi blatantly violated the terms of Sikkim’s integration with India…If perceived closely none of the 32 seats in the House and the two seats in the Parliament are reserved exclusively for Sikkimese. This indeed is a blatant act of betrayal. Because of this non-Sikkimese have found a place in the House much to the detriment of bonafide Sikkimese who are largely Sikkimese Nepalese.”

   I even hinted on the need to boycott the polls if New Delhi remained adamant on preserving status quo on the seat issue: “The political leadership in the State needs to take the seat reservation issue more seriously. Mere adoption of this basic demand in their party resolution and manifesto will not do. This demand has been raised at appropriate fora for nearly 25 years now. If the Centre fails to act positively on this vital demand then the Sikkimese people need to do some rethinking.”

    I added: “Erosion of Sikkim’s distinct identity within the Union through violation of ‘merger terms’ cannot and should not be tolerated any longer. If political parties fail to get this demand met then the Sikkimese people may resort to the last option of boycotting Assembly and Lok Sabha polls in the State. Democracy provides an opportunity to the people to exercise or not to exercise their franchise. If the need arises the Sikkimese people can send empty ballot boxes to New Delhi during the elections. By doing this they will not only be merely implementing the oft-repeated slogan – ‘No Seat, No Vote’ – but would have also sent the ultimate message to the Government of India.”

   The OSU leader and former minister of the L.D. Kazi Government (1974-1979), K.C. Pradhan, submitted a ‘7-Point Charter of Demand’ to the President of India in July 1999, demanding formation of a high-level committee to look into “the seat reservation issue before the situation gets out of hand.” Pradhan - perhaps the key figure and the main leader of the Nepalese during the merger era - who was also one of the main signatories to the historic May 8, 1973 Tripartite Agreement, warned: “Continued violation of the terms of merger and deprivation of the political rights of the Sikkimese people cannot be tolerated any longer.” He sent an ultimatum on the seat issue: “The basic political rights of the Sikkimese people must be restored before April 2000 when Sikkim completes 25 years as an Indian State.”

   Pradhan added: “I have from time to time made several representations to the concerned authorities in Delhi and Gangtok about the deteriorating political situation in the State but so far the plight and problems of the Sikkimese people have been ignored. Unfortunately, Delhi continues to ignore my warnings. If the situation is not handled carefully and timely Sikkim will head towards political uncertainty at the dawn of the next millennium. This is neither in the interest of the Sikkimese people nor the nation’s security interests in the region.”

   Pradhan’s stand on the seat issue is consistent with the OSU’s views on the said issue. As early as January 1998, I – as OSU Chairman – made a Press statement urging the Centre to restore the seats by April 2000, when Sikkim completes 25 years as a State of India: “Merger with the world’s largest democracy twenty-three years ago would be meaningless if the Sikkimese people are deprived of their fundamental and constitutional rights.”

   I pointed out: “Ever since the merger in 1975 political leadership in the State has been constantly harping on the need for the Centre to respect and honour the ‘terms of the merger’ but the authorities in Delhi are yet to respond positively and decisively on major issues that concern the Sikkimese people…We have waited for more than two decades for restoration of our political rights and this cannot go on forever. By the turn of the century Sikkim will complete 25 years as part of the Indian Union. The Centre must immediately initiate moves to restore Assembly seats for the Sikkimese and the legal and constitutional process on this issue should be completed by the end of 1999.”

   Pradhan’s 7-Point demand included revision of voters list on the basis of 1974 electoral rolls – which had names of only ‘Sikkim Subjects’, delimitation of Assembly constituencies, and safeguards for ‘other Sikkimese’, meaning those other than ‘original Sikkimese’ residing in the State such as members of the old business community and others.

   My last call before the October 1999 Assembly polls on the seat issue featured in the editorial of the Observer, dated September 18-21, 1999, and captioned “Total Revolution” – ‘No Reservation, No Election’: “It is significant to note that the BL Apex body has now urged the larger Sikkimese Nepalese community to back their demand and give them the much-needed support. Wounded by the failure of the political leadership among the Nepalese community to respect their political rights, pending the finalization of the Assembly seat issue, the BLs have now turned towards the Sikkimese Nepalese people themselves and others to come to their aid. In a democracy, it is the majority community which must rule but protections and safeguards must be provided to the minority community. In their lust for power the political leadership in Sikkim are (is) forgetting and ignoring the just demands of the people and are (is) deliberately trampling over their political rights and thereby hurting the sentiments of the people. No political party in the State has the mandate to further divide the people, dilute their political rights and cause social disharmony and political instability in this strategic border State.”

   The editorial added: “It is now up to the Sikkimese people to come forward and respect the sentiments of their brothers and sisters in distress. The BLs are confident that their hope placed on the larger community will get the right response. But while the BLs desire and expect support from the Sikkimese Nepalese they must also realize that the majority community, too, are in a fix and are demanding restoration of their reserved seats in the Assembly and should be prepared to fight unitedly for restoration of the political rights of all Sikkimese.

   Time is running out and the Sikkimese Nepalese cannot now afford to pin their hopes on the politicians for their long-term interest. There are no easy answers to the political uncertainty faced by the Sikkimese masses. By calling for boycott the BLs have shown that elections are no solutions to the political crisis faced by the Sikkimese people. Making representations to the concerned authorities, be it in Gangtok or New Delhi, is not enough. For the past 20 years various social and political organizations have rightly demanded restoration of the Assembly seats for the Sikkimese people.”

   The editorial concluded: “Memoranda after memoranda have been submitted on the issue but what has been the net result of all these endeavours? While political rhetoric on the issue continues the seat issue is yet to be resolved. Any further violations of the terms of the merger cannot and must not be tolerated any longer. By keeping the issue perpetually pending the political leadership, in collaboration with New Delhi, are gradually leading the Sikkimese people to political suicide…There cannot be more articulate and eloquent way of expressing the total sense of frustration and resentment over the continued violation of the merger accord and abuse of the people’s mandate than to take a firm step on the issue and boycott the coming elections in the State.”

   Though our appeal for total boycott of the polls was serious and genuine we were aware of the fact that the appeal – made at the last moment – would not be well received by political parties which were totally engrossed in the poll process. This was quite understandable although they should realize by now the importance of adopting a strong stand on the seat issue if they are at all serious about the future of Sikkim and the Sikkimese people.

   Our stand at that stage was symbolic but the message and the spirit in which we chose to adopt this stand would be welcomed by the people. And yet we were delighted when the Congress (I) candidate, Tseten Lepcha, from my own home constituency of Lachen-Mangshilla, North Sikkim, withdrew his nomination papers in response to our appeal. Lepcha may have played his cards well during the polls and killed many birds with one stone but his gesture was significant and appreciated by the people.

   He told reporters that in view of the pre-poll developments on the seat issue he felt it was his bounden duty not to take part in the polls in order “to protest, to express our deep anguish and to prove that if the need arises, the Lepchas are prepared to make the supreme sacrifice to fight for our cause.” It is also significant that these words come from the son of a former MLA from the tribal-dominated north district, Tasa Tingay Lepcha, who earlier contested and won from the Lachen-Mangshilla constituency. Majority of voters in this constituency, which had a sizable number of Limbus, were BLs.

   Just days before the scheduled date of the proposed hunger strike on October 2, 1999, the OSU and SIBLAC formed the Sikkimese Nepalese Apex Committee (SNAC) in Geyzing, West Sikkim. The new body was formed at a joint meeting of the OSU and SIBLAC and was chaired by K.C. Pradhan. Buddhilal Khamdak, a young and educated Nepali from the Limbu community in West Sikkim, was made the SNAC’s Convenor. The newly-formed body supported the seat issue demand raised by the SIBLAC and OSU and urged the two organisations to support the demand on restoration of Assembly seats of the Sikkimese Nepalese.

   On October 2, while the rest of the nation celebrated the 130th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi (Gandhi Jayanti), the Sikkimese people – represented by SIBLAC, OSU and SNAC – sought the blessing of the ‘Father of the Nation’ and the Guardian Deities of Sikkim in their struggle on restoration of their political rights. The 12-hour hunger strike by six representatives of the three ethnic communities at the ‘BL House’ in Gangtok on October 2 symbolically ushered in a new phase in the fight for restoration of the political rights of bonafide Sikkimese belonging to the three ethnic communities.

Four members of the SIBLAC – two convenors (Nima Lepcha and Pintso Bhutia), Vice-Convenor Tenzing Namgyal, and a woman representative (Gyamsay Bhutia), the SNAC Advisor K.C. Pradhan and myself as OSU Chairman took part in the historic one-day hunger strike on October 2, 1999.

   We had actually chosen the premises where the ‘Statues of Unity’ are installed for the venue of the one-day hunger strike. Located in the heart of the capital at the northern end of the Mahatma Gandhi Marg – the main market area in the capital – this venue would have been the ideal place to begin a prolonged and intensive campaign on the seat issue. However, the State Government refused to allow us to use this place. In fact, it asked us to call off the hunger strike and the boycott call.

   In a letter to the SIBLAC, dated September 17, 1999, Chief Secretary Sonam Wangdi said redressal of grievances should be done through participation in the electoral process and pointed out that boycott of elections “is the last action to be taken as the final resort when all other means have failed.” The Chief Secretary simply could not see that we had resorted to this method as “all other means”, including the electoral process, in the past two decades failed to achieve the desired result. We ignored the government’s plea and went ahead with the hunger strike.

   However, it must be placed on record that if it hadn’t been for the OSU the hunger strike and boycott call may have been put off. Pradhan and I tactfully and very firmly exerted enough pressure on the SIBLAC leadership, which was dithering on the issue at the last moment when they were under extreme pressure. Even if the SIBLAC had backed off at the last moment the OSU and SNAC would have certainly continued with the mission. No amount of tactics and pressure would work on Pradhan and me and on this we were very confident.

   As planned, we held the hunger strike on October 2 to remind the world that we were determined to struggle on till our demand on restoration of our political rights were met. While others fought the elections we fought for our people. We were not concerned with who wins or loses in the polls; our main concern was that if the Assembly seats were not restored to us in the near future we would be the ultimate losers and the electoral process would then become a meaningless ritual as the Sikkimese people would have no future to look forward to.

(Ref: The Lone Warrior: Exiled In My Homeland, Jigme N. Kazi, Hill Media Publications, 2014, Sikkim Observer and Blog: jigmenkazisikkim.blospot.com.)