What is Nagaland’s job quota issue? | Explained

The story so far: On April 26, an organization of five “forward” tribes in Nagaland created a 30 -day deadline for reviewing the business reservation policy for the state’s backward tribes (BTS), led by Neiphiu Rio. On September 22, the government created a panel to examine the business quota policy, but found a mistake with its five -concept organ name.

What is a business reservation policy?

Almost four years after reaching the state in December 1963, Nagaland brought a policy to reserve 80% of the state government for all domestic planned tribes. In 1977, the government detected 11 IT and shared things known as “reservation in reservation için for them. In August 2024, Prime Minister Neiphiu Rio said that 37% of the 60 -member Nagaland Assembly is now reserved for BTS. He said that this quota was divided into 25% for seven IT in the East Nagaland, and 12% for Kiphire, Longleng, Pzt, Song, Shostator and Tuensang – and the remaining four IT. A notification made from the State Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department in April 2011 will club for half of the Chakhesang and Pocury tribes living in the PHEK region, and the Zelang tribe will have 4% of their reserved government affairs and the remaining 2% will be separated for the SUMI tribe in the Kiphire region. Beyond Kiphire, Sumis is among the five communities that do not have IT, along with Sumis, Anamis, Aos, Lothas and color.

Why do tribes want this policy to be reviewed?

In September 2024, the Five Tribal Reservation Policy Review Committee (CORRP) presented a memorandum to the state government that demanded the evaluation of the business quota system. The members of this committee are representatives of APEKS social bodies of each of these five tribes. The Committee argued that policy was relevant in 1977, but that the state no longer reflects the dominant socio-economic and education view. Secretary GK Zhimomi said that Corrp’s basic demand was to “completely scrape the reservation policy or to allocate the remaining (20%) quota to five tribes”. The authority said that the government returned to review the policy in 1987 and published an order by stating that the quota signs will continue until the next announcement two years later. Corrp set the first 30 -day deadline on April 26th for the government to take action on a review request. “We are not against any tribe benefiting from the reservation policy. The review of this 48 -year -old policy is now delayed because of a very different scenario,” he said.

How did the government react?

In response to Corrp’s request, BTS’s students and social organizations, listed as the beneficiary of the business quota, opposed any potential revision, arguing that dilution of the current policy would disproportionate to the state’s marginal communities. The government, who was careful against a reaction from these tribes, chose to carefully print. Corrp launched the first agitation phase after the 30 -day ultimatum ended. Deputy Prime Minister Yanthungo Patton was suspended after making sure that the policy review commission would be formed until June 17th. However, RIO has only been amended on August 18, after it should be realized for the national population purchasing planned for a commission dated 2027, including reservations or restrictions. Nagaland squad. The next day, the government spokesman and Minister Kg Kenye stated official data to claim that 64% of the government affairs of the tribes of CT tribes, which are not five IT, and 34% of IT tribes. He said that the status quo should be protected.

Why does the dead end continue?

Corrp criticized the first commission declared in August, hosting a member of the Eastern Nagaland People’s Organization, the Council of Nagaland tribes, and a member of Nagaland Nagaland. They insisted that this commission lacks impartiality, as these three organizations represented BTS completely or partially. Corrp also found a mistake with the government’s second commission on 22 September. The government said that instead of the ‘Reservation Investigation Commission’, this panel deviated from an agreement to call the ‘Business Reservation Commission’ and implied that it was not serious to review the current quota system. The difference on the naming of the panel has not yet been solved.