The publication also recalls that “on the basis of this agreement, the one-vote principle was introduced and parliamentary elections were held on 13 April 1974, which were the first and last such elections of the Independent Sikkim. After the elections, the Sikkim National Congress and the Sikkim Janata Congress claimed that electoral manipulation had taken place in a constituency. They called for the arrest of the officials involved, but these requests were not met, which led to protests.  The riots culminated on 8 May in the signing of a tripartite agreement between the Choydal, Sikkimese and Indian government political parties. The agreement provided for the formation of a responsible government under the supervision of an executive chief appointed by the Indian government. “This agreement is of the utmost importance to all Sikkimese. The Indian government is recalling the terms of the 8 May agreement and is still formulating strategies and programmes for Sikkim,” he said. The House of Princes, 1922: The fact that Sikkim is a member of the House of Princes of India is a legal issue that was revived at the time of the annexation of Sikkim. When, under Section 7 of the Indian Independence Act of 1947, the over-education of the British crown over Indian states died out, all members of the House of Princes became technically independent states. The Indian princes then merged with the Dominion of India by signing accession and merger agreements. Indian governments claim that Sikkim, as a member of the House of Princes, was in fact another princely state of India.
The Chogyal`s legal adviser stated that Sikkim was only formally a member of the House, a body which had no executive powers, and that Sikkim was indeed involved in special contractual relations with the British crown. Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1890: according to this convention, which arranged between the representatives of the British crown and the Emperor of China, Sikkim would have been recognized as a protectorate of the British government. Neither Sikkim nor Tibet were consulted and were not parties to the agreement. The tripartite agreement called for the formation of a fully responsible government in the kingdom of Sikkim at the time, with more democratic and important legislative and executive powers for elected officials. The Chogyal was liberated in 1895, but British governors in India rejected an agreement – the agreement of ten clauses – that restored sovereignty to Sikkim. The political officer in Sikkim, John Claude White, refused to restore any sovereignty, leaving only the Chogyal to guard the Sikkim`s justice system. May 8 Agreement 1973: This was an agreement reached by the Chogyal, the government of India and the leaders of the political parties of Sikkim after the total collapse of law and order. After agitations in favour of a “more democratic constitution” and “increased legislative and executive powers for elected officials”, there have been serious outbursts of violence in Gangtok. Both were included in the agreement. In addition, the Indian government was asked to “take responsibility” for the law and order and to appoint a head of administration or a head of administration in Sikkim. Elections were introduced on the basis of a one-man vote.