President’s Rule isn’t about Manipur’s suffering – it’s about BJP’s politics

Feb 17, 2025 16:12 IST

First published on: Feb 17, 2025 at 16:12 IST

Share

Declaring that “a situation has arisen in which the government of that state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India”, the Government of India has taken over the administration of Manipur. The move is, some say, “too little, too late”, while others welcome it as a step to restore constitutional order and peace in the state. These views, while commonsensical, obfuscate the reason behind this decision and the government’s dubious role in the making of the Manipur tragedy.

The imposition of the President’s Rule in Manipur is not because there is “absolutely no law and order… an absolute breakdown of constitutional machinery in Manipur”, as the Supreme Court had observed two months after the violence erupted on May 3, 2023 It’s worth remembering that the Prime Minister — who has all the time to visit places across the world and even extended his good offices to bring peace in Ukraine – has not visited Manipur to date. He has insisted, including in Parliament, that “violence has gone down”, the “situation is normal” and “like normal times schools, colleges and offices and other establishment are functioning” in the state.

Story continues below this ad

N Biren Singh was ordered to resign as Chief Minister by the party leadership in New Delhi not because he had failed to deal with the lawlessness and violence in Manipur. He has been their Man Friday and a convenient alibi. Lest we forget, Amit Shah admitted on the floor of the House that the then CM was “cooperating” with the Union government just as Singh had also told the media that whatever he did was with “the consent” and “the advice” of the prime minister and the home minister.

Without resorting to legitimate constitutional measures, the Union government encroached on what Babasaheb Ambedkar called states’ “sovereign and plenary” authority. From the appointment of the Chief Secretary and the Director General Police of the state to the decision as to who shall head the institution that deals with the crucial coordination of the security and law enforcement agencies, the Union government had been dictating to the state government from day one of the crisis.

Incidentally, Biren Singh had publicly admitted to this encroachment in many ways. For instance, he openly rued that the CID of the state police had not been reporting to him for 15 months. Instances of central security agencies refusing to follow his orders and open confrontations among security and law enforcement agencies were also widely reported in the media.

Story continues below this ad

Emboldening the divisive and communal politics that belligerently pursue the bifurcation of the state based on exclusivist communal identities, Singh told the media after meeting the Union Home Minister that the law and order in “the valley” and “the hills” were being looked after by him and Amit Shah, respectively. It’s public knowledge that the Modi-Shah-led BJP sought the help of Kuki armed groups under the Suspension of Operations agreement during elections in exchange for the consideration of their demands.

The result of this subversion is there for all to see — despite the presence of more than 60,000 central troops over and above the local police, this beautiful state has been subjected to unprecedented pain and humiliation, resulting in the colossal loss of lives and properties of innocent denizens.

Thus, to see President’s Rule as a move by the Government of India to restore constitutional order in the state is a cruel joke inflicted on a suffering people. This latest move is an attempt to hide the failures of the ruling party and its government. There has been growing resentment amongst the members of the BJP-led ruling alliance against Biren Singh’s style of functioning. Many of them could sense the growing public dislike for the BJP due to its handling of the ongoing crisis and the tangible prospect that the party would be routed in the next state assembly election if the present situation continues. As a result, the BJP faced the likelihood of an open rebellion, including a possible no-confidence motion in the Assembly.

These developments compelled the party bosses in Delhi to act against Biren Singh, who is seen by many as a part of the problem. Yet, despite enjoying an overwhelming majority in the State Assembly, they could not come to a consensus on who should substitute him. Hence, the decision to impose President’s Rule.

For normalcy to return to Manipur and for justice for the people of the state, there has to be accountability, including for the conduct of the Union government. Only a Joint Parliamentary Committee to examine the multiple dimensions of the crisis in Manipur can fix this accountability, not President’s Rule.

The writer, faculty at JNU, is a Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha).