A group of former Members of Parliament from Sikkim has submitted a petition to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, demanding the restoration of political and legal rights for the Nepali-origin Sikkimese community under Article 371F of the Indian Constitution. The appeal, rooted in Sikkim’s pre-1975 merger history, highlights a growing rift between constitutional guarantees and the community’s fading representation.
A Constitutional Battle Reignited
The Former MPs Forum argues that Nepali-origin Sikkimese, recognized as “Sikkim Subjects” under the 1961 Sikkim Subject Register, were guaranteed protections when Sikkim joined India in 1975. Key clauses of Article 371F, particularly (f), (k), (l), (m), (n), and (o), were meant to safeguard their land rights, political representation, and cultural identity. Yet, the forum claims these promises remain unfulfilled, notably the loss of a reserved seat in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly once held by the community under the Chogyal’s rule.
The Historical Backdrop: From Chogyal’s Rule to Indian Merger
Before 1975, Sikkim was a monarchy with distinct ethnic classifications. The 1961 Sikkim Subject Regulation defined who counted as Sikkimese, including Nepali-origin families who had lived in the region for generations. The register became the basis for Indian citizenship after the merger. However, post-1975 policies gradually eroded Nepali political influence, including the abolition of their reserved assembly seat a move the forum calls a “betrayal” of Article 371F’s intent.
Why Article 371F Matters
-
Clause (f): Protects pre-merger laws and quotas.
-
Clause (k): Ensures federal laws cannot override Sikkim Subjects’ rights.
-
Clause (l): Shields land ownership for original Sikkimese, including Nepalis.
Despite these provisions, Nepali-origin Sikkimese face bureaucratic hurdles in land disputes and are often labeled “non-native” despite centuries-old roots.
The Petition’s Core Demands
The forum’s appeal to PM Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah outlines three key requests:
-
Restore the Assembly Seat: Reinstate the reserved seat for Nepali Subject Holders, as existed pre-1975.
-
Clarify Land Rights: Enforce Article 371F to prevent land alienation from Nepali-origin families.
-
Review Citizenship Criteria: Ensure Sikkim Subject descendants retain privileges under the merger terms.
This isn’t the first push for action. Similar petitions were filed with Sikkim’s Governor and Chief Minister Prem Singh Tamang-Golay, but with no resolution. The escalation to Delhi signals mounting frustration.
Broader Implications: Identity and Federal Trust
The issue transcends Sikkim. It tests India’s commitment to asymmetric federalism, as seen in special provisions for regions like Nagaland (Article 371A) and Mizoram (Article 371G). Critics argue that ignoring Article 371F risks eroding trust in other northeastern states.
Ethnic Tensions Simmer
-
Bhutia-Lepcha vs. Nepali Divide: The Bhutia-Lepcha communities, classified as Scheduled Tribes (STs), enjoy land and job quotas. Nepali-origin Sikkimese, despite their historical status, lack similar safeguards, fueling resentment.
-
Legal Battles: A 2023 Supreme Court remark labeling Nepalis “foreign-origin” sparked protests, later retracted but leaving scars.
Modi’s Political Tightrope
With Sikkim’s Legislative Assembly reconvening on June 30, pressure is building. The BJP, allied with CM Tamang’s Sikkim Democratic Front, risks alienating Nepali voters, who comprise 65% of the state’s population before 1975.
Recent Context
-
Infrastructure Focus: The CM has recently prioritized land acquisition for highways and power projects, but issues related to ethnic rights remain unresolved.
-
Disaster Pressures: The June 1 Chaten landslides, which killed nine, including army personnel, diverted attention but underscored Sikkim’s fragility, a metaphor for its political tensions.
What’s Next?
The ball is in Modi’s court. The forum’s petition coincides with Sikkim’s push for modernized land records (NAKSHA project) and disaster resilience tech, yet constitutional promises remain in limbo.
