Circumlocution: Jishnu’s tongue-in-cheek on Greater Tipraland demand
Jishnu Dev Varma
Former Deputy Chief Minister Jishnu Dev Varma has come out in a tongue-in-cheek way with an interesting expression -‘CIRCUMLOCUTION’- to describe the rhetoric of the votaries of the Greater Tipraland. Dev Varma who was actually reacting to a question posted in a social platform as to whether it would really be possible to divide Tripura in two through a ‘Constitutional solution’. We reproduce here the former Deputy Chief Minister and senior BJP leader’s comment as it was which he started with a sort of disclaimer. Although he said that he was not a constitutional expert and that he does not pretend to be one too, his comments clearly brought to forethe ignorance or ‘Circumlocution’, as put it- about the constitutional issues vis a vis Greater Tipraland demand of the ‘Separatists’ (ED)
My commentary is lengthy as it goes into details of Constitutional Solutions-A Shift from GT.
Where is the connection of abrogation of Article 370 and Art 35A of the constitution which were temporary provisions with TTAADC or Article 371 which is special provisions granted to several states. 371 F is special provision to Sikkim.
Can greater Tipraland come into existence through Article 371F special provision which gives certain safeguards to state of Sikkim not 6th schedule area.
Now on Eastern Nagaland - a meeting was held for constitution of an Autonomous Council for six eastern districts of the state namely Tuensang, Mon, Longleng, Kiphire, Shamator and Noklsk. This is where the Konyak, Khiamniungan, Chang, Sangtam, Tikhir, Phom and Yimkhiung tribes 30 pc of population stay.
In Tripura we have one council for all districts and all 19 tribes. Where is the applicability of this example in our state. Where is the similarity?
Next formation of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh through reorganisation act (Article 3) was passed to reconstitute the state into two UTs.
Now the moot question is what is the so called constitutional solution for Greater Tipraland.
A) Is it under Article 371 ? which is special provisions giving more power to TTAADC though as of now Art 371 applies to state not 6th schedule area. The example of Art. 371F given applies to the state of Sikkim not to Dist Council.
If the idea of GT is safeguard and more power then all that is needed, is to support the State Cabinet Decision sent to Centre and ask them to change the name of the Tipra Territorial council by adding the word Greater before the word Tipra! ( it maybe a face saver) What was all this shouting, and sloganeering about.?
If the idea of GT is separate state then reorganisation act (Article 3) is to be applied. Then there is no need to give examples of 371F or Eastern Nagaland unless of course the concept of GT is “ Anything is sufficient .
It appears “ This is or that or anything else“ is the much talked of Constitutional Solution as per indications given. There is no certainty nor clarity on this. All sorts of examples J&K, Ladakh, 371F Sikkim, Eastern Nagaland , 6th schedule Tripura each different in its composition and circumstances and in applicability of Articles of the Constitution - Perhaps indicating “Anything will suffice.”
There is a straight way of saying things:-
CONSTITUTIONAL SOLUTION IS WHAT?
ARTICLE 371 SPECIAL PROVISION ( more power & Fin) OR
Article 3 REORGANISATION ACT (SEPARATE STATE.)
THIS NEEDS CLARITY - WHICH ONE??
CIRCUMLOCUTION - speaking in circles only creates confusion thereby misleads.