“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.)
