The United Sangtam Likhum Pumji (USLP) has formally appealed to the Eastern Nagaland Peoples’ Organization (ENPO) to reconsider and relax the upper age limit prescribed under Clause 2.3.2 of the framework for selection of members to the Frontier Nagaland Territory (FNT) Interim Council.
The decision to submit the appeal was taken during an emergency meeting of the USLP held at Hopongkyu Memorial Hall on March 24. The organization stated that the meeting unanimously resolved to voice its grievances regarding the disqualification of a United Sangtam candidate for the Interim Council.
In its representation addressed to the ENPO president, the USLP expressed strong resentment over the disqualification, which it said was based on the age criteria outlined in Clause 2.3.2. The organization questioned the legality and fairness of the provision, raising concerns over its constitutional validity and adherence to principles of natural justice.
The USLP contended that the said criterion lacks a clear foundation within the Constitution of India, particularly in relation to provisions ensuring equality before the law and equal opportunity. It argued that any rule affecting representation must align with constitutional safeguards.
Further, the organization alleged that the application of the age criterion amounts to an “ultra vires” exercise of authority, stating that the ENPO, as a representative body, does not possess unrestricted powers to impose disqualification rules that may contradict constitutional principles.
Download Nagaland Tribune app on Google Play
The USLP also raised concerns over what it termed as arbitrary and non-transparent implementation of the clause, pointing out the absence of publicly available documentation, procedural safeguards and uniform enforcement. It said such lapses undermine fairness and accountability in the selection process.
Highlighting the impact of the decision, the organization stated that the disqualification has affected the representation of the Sangtam community in the proposed FNT Interim Council, thereby affecting inclusivity and participatory governance.
The USLP further argued that the clause lacks statutory backing, maintaining that any disqualification criteria must be supported by a duly notified rule or legal instrument. It also referred to provisions under special preference considerations in the framework, which, it said, allow for flexibility based on merit and service.
In light of these concerns, the USLP placed several demands before the ENPO, including immediate disclosure of the full text and legal basis of Clause 2.3.2, clarification on its consistency with constitutional provisions, and reconsideration of the disqualified candidate.
The organization also sought assurances that future actions would strictly adhere to constitutional principles and transparency, emphasizing that the issue goes beyond an individual case and concerns the broader principles of justice, legality and democratic representation.
The USLP expressed hope that the ENPO would act fairly and address the matter promptly, calling for a positive response within 6 p.m. of March 24.
