Article 355 - Diversity Management Affect Peace in Manipur

The ongoing violence in Manipur has raised concerns over the effectiveness of constitutional mechanisms to manage diverse identities and maintain peace. Recent demands from the Chief Minister for greater control over security operations and the invocation of Article 355 highlight the urgency of addressing the breakdown of constitutional machinery in the state.

This Q&A format aims to explore how constitutional accommodation can be a remedy for the escalating tensions in Manipur and other northeastern states.

What recent events in Manipur indicate a breakdown of constitutional order?

The Chief Minister’s demands for more control over security operations suggest a lack of effective governance. Reports of invoking Article 355 of the Constitution, which mandates the Union to protect states from internal disturbances, signal serious concerns regarding law and order in Manipur.

Why is diversity management significant in the Indian Constitution?

Diversity management is a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution, allowing for “special provisions” to accommodate the unique needs of various states. This approach addresses issues related to equitable development and the preservation of cultural identities, essential in a nation as diverse as India.

How does the Constitution reconcile competing interests in northeastern states?

The Constitution has established mechanisms for power-sharing, representation, and autonomy in governance, particularly in northeastern states. This aims to address the concerns of various identity groups and foster political stability, preventing conflict and fragmentation within society.

What role does Article 371F play in the context of Sikkim’s integration into India?

Article 371F, introduced after Sikkim’s accession in 1975, provides special provisions to protect the rights of different population segments. It empowers Parliament to ensure social and economic advancement for diverse communities, aiming for political stability through representation and cultural autonomy.

What was the significance of the R.C. Poudyal case in 1993?

The R.C. Poudyal case addressed the constitutionality of Article 371F and its provisions for increased representation of the Bhutia-Lepcha community in Sikkim. The Supreme Court upheld this arrangement, emphasizing the necessity of historical considerations in power-sharing to protect minority identities and maintain political stability.

How does Tripura illustrate constitutional accommodation?

Tripura’s example demonstrates how constitutional mechanisms can foster peace during insurgency. The Sixth Schedule, applied to Tripura in 1984, established district councils with legislative powers, promoting self-governance and addressing tribal concerns, as seen in the Tripura Accord of 1988.

What were the outcomes of the Tripura Accord regarding legislative representation?

The Tripura Accord resulted in the insertion of provisions reserving a third of the state assembly seats for the Scheduled Tribe population, addressing historical grievances and ensuring their representation in governance. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court, which recognized the need for temporary measures to foster inclusivity.

How does the situation in Manipur compare with Tripura’s constitutional provisions?

Unlike Tripura, which benefits from the Sixth Schedule, Manipur operates under Article 371C, lacking similar autonomy and representation for its Hill Area Committee. This discrepancy exacerbates tensions over governance, resource allocation, and community representation.

What lessons can be drawn from the Supreme Court’s recent judgments regarding Assam and its implications for Manipur?

The Supreme Court’s judgments concerning Assam demonstrate a judicial preference for accommodating diverse identities while promoting fraternity. Such decisions can serve as a precedent for addressing Manipur’s unique challenges through constitutional means.

In what way can the Constitution serve as a framework for peace in Manipur?

The Constitution’s adaptability and emphasis on diversity can guide solutions to Manipur’s tensions. The Court’s acknowledgment of historical complexities highlights the need for constitutional mechanisms to evolve in response to societal changes, ensuring that peace is achieved through inclusive governance and recognition of pluralism.

Article 355 of the Indian Constitution –

It addresses the responsibilities of the Union government in protecting the states against external aggression and internal disturbances.

Key Provisions of Article 355

1. Protection of States: Article 355 mandates the Union to ensure that the governance of each state is carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. This includes maintaining the constitutional order in the states.

2. External Aggression and Internal Disturbances: The article empowers the Union government to intervene in a state’s affairs if there is a threat of external aggression or if there are internal disturbances that threaten the peace and security of the state.

3. Union’s Responsibility: It places a responsibility on the Union to protect states from both external and internal threats. The nature of these threats can vary and can include armed conflicts, riots, or any form of civil unrest.

4. Operational Mechanism: The enforcement of Article 355 is often facilitated through various mechanisms, such as the imposition of President’s Rule under Article 356, where the President of India can assume control of the state government if the constitutional machinery fails.

Context and Significance

1. Historical Background: Article 355 was included in the Constitution to ensure that the Indian state remains stable and that the Union can respond swiftly to any threats to the integrity and sovereignty of the nation.

2. Preventive Measures: The provision serves as a preventive measure, allowing the central government to act before situations escalate into larger conflicts or breakdowns in law and order.

3. Balance of Power: Article 355 plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance of power between the Union and state governments, ensuring that states cannot deviate significantly from the constitutional framework.