My Struggle – VIII

GENUINE REPRESENTATION IN THE ASSEMBLY

   The common misconception on the seat issue is that restoration of Assembly seats to the Sikkimese would mean resorting to the pre-merger seat arrangement (15 seats for BLs, 15 for Nepalese, 1 each for Sangha and Scheduled Castes) in the Assembly, commonly referred to as the “parity formula”, which has been vociferously opposed by a section of the Nepalese during the merger era and thereafter. If we feel that this formula is unjust, unfair, undemocratic and, therefore, unacceptable to us then we have to arrive at a consensus formula through debate and discussion in an atmosphere of mutual trust, understanding, cooperation and tolerance. The basic issue is to ensure that all or majority of the seats in the Assembly – be it 32, 40 or even 60 – be reserved for the three ethnic communities as in the past. We must not allow politicians and vested interests to misguide and lead us astray on this vital issue.

   I personally have always been very open and broadminded on the seat issue. The important thing is that we all think, act and live like a ‘Sikkimese’ – as truly belonging to and caring for Sikkim and the Sikkimese – and not let caste, race and communal politics affect our outlook. I have always been very sensitive on dealing with the seat formula and throughout my professional and political career in the past so many years I have kept mum on this very sensitive and touchy issue.

   At times, K.C. Pradhan, on his personal capacity, publicly declared his own seat formula. But neither the OSU nor I have been party to his formula on the seat issue. His formulae were his personal views – not mine or that of the OSU. I have never openly accepted or rejected Pradhan’s formula though I reported on it in my paper on several occasions. However, I have often taken the liberty of advising Pradhan not to spell out any formula before discussing it with others – formally or informally.

   Arriving at a seat formula before public debate and discussion would not only be like putting the cart before the horse, it would also be undemocratic and unwise. Furthermore, it would lead to unnecessary confusion, misunderstanding and tension – perfect ingredients for vested interests to stall the issue. In fact, this is exactly what happened as we shall see.

   My own views on the seat formula is that we should have a broader outlook in resolving this long-pending demand. Besides the three ethnic communities we need to respect the sentiments and aspirations of those belonging to the business community who are not only plainspeople but come from the hills of Darjeeling, Kalimpong and Kurseong. Then there are others who are temporary residents in the State. Some of them, in years to come, may be referred to as ‘locals’ in the broader sense of the word. As we are now part of India we need to take a broader view - perhaps a more humane approach – on the seat issue and find out ways to ensure that all those residing in Sikkim, whether on permanent or temporary basis, are fairly represented in the Assembly on a long-term basis.

   Genuine representation of the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas in the Assembly can only be achieved through a just and fair delimitation of Assembly constituencies. The recent delimitation of Assembly constituencies carried out in the State is not in the interest of the minority community. The voting system of the Sangha, based on electoral college, where only the lamas vote for their representative, seems to be an ideal system for the BLs as their population is not only diminishing but scattered all over the State.

   In the past three decades (1974-2004), BL representatives in the Assembly have not been able to fully represent their communities in as well as outside the Assembly and the government as majority of voters in almost all the 12 seats reserved for the BLs were non-BLs belonging basically to the majority Nepalese community. This system has done great injustice to the BLs who see themselves as the vanishing tribes in Sikkim.

   The ‘parity formula’, i.e. reservation of equal number of seats between the BLs and Nepalese, may not be acceptable to the majority Sikkimese Nepalese. We must, therefore, respect their sentiments and evolve a suitable formula on the seat issue that would satisfy the Nepalese and yet be acceptable to the BLs. I believe that in the long run it is better for the Sikkimese Nepalese to have seats reserved for them in the Assembly then to increase the general seats to accommodate them and others. Ultimately, general seats will be filled up by non-Sikkimese, who enter the State from the neighbouring states and countries. The distinct identity and political rights of Sikkimese Nepalese can best be safeguarded if seats are reserved for them in the Assembly. Its small population, the increasing influx of outsiders, and the strategic location of the State are basic factors that help to justify the case for Assembly seat reservation for bonafide Sikkimese. Moreover, India has a moral duty to abide by the assurances given to the Sikkimese people during the merger.

 

 

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

Jigme N. Kazi:

Since 1983, Jigme N. Kazi has worked for numerous local, regional, national and international publications and news services, including Eastern Express, North East Daily, The Telegraph, The Statesman, The Times of India, United News of India (UNI), Inter Press Service (IPS), and The Independent (Nepal).

   He is the editor-cum-proprietor of Sikkim Observer and Himalayan Guardian and author of Inside Sikkim: Against The Tide (1993), Sikkim For Sikkimese: Distinct Identity Within The Union (2009), The Lone Warrior: Exiled In My Homeland (2014), Sons of Sikkim: The Rise and Fall of the Namgyal Dynasty of Sikkim and Hail Mt. Hermon! A Tribute (2020).