Syllabus
GS Paper 1 – Post-independence consolidation and reorganization within the country.
Context
The healing touch of constitutional accommodation is the only way out for Manipur
Source
The Hindu| Editorial dated 24th October 2024
The Manipur crisis, the issue of managing diversity
The recent violence in Manipur highlights the challenges of managing diversity within India’s constitutional framework. The invocation of Article 355, combined with demands from the Chief Minister for greater control over security, has raised concerns about the state’s governance and the efficacy of the Constitution in addressing identity-based conflicts.
India’s constitutional approach to diversity management, particularly in the northeast, offers valuable insights. By examining the special provisions for states like Sikkim and Tripura, we can reflect on how the Constitution has evolved to reconcile competing identities and preserve peace.
Special Provisions in the Indian Constitution
- Article 371: Several Indian states, including Sikkim, Nagaland, Assam, and Manipur, enjoy special provisions to manage unique challenges related to equitable development or preserving cultural identities.
- Purpose of Special Provisions: These provisions aim to address regional socio-political contexts and promote power sharing and autonomy in governance, ensuring political stability.
- Federalism in India: The Constitution balances federalism as a necessity in managing India’s vast diversity, ensuring that cultural autonomy leads to political stability.
The Case of Sikkim and Article 371F
- Sikkim’s Accession (1975): Article 371F was introduced after Sikkim’s accession to India, offering special protection for different sections of its population.
- Power Sharing: Article 371F(f) empowered Parliament to protect the rights of Sikkim’s Bhutia-Lepcha community, ensuring a representation scheme in the Legislative Assembly to preserve their identity.
- R.C. Poudyal Case (1993): The Supreme Court upheld Article 371F(f), stating that historical considerations justified the unequal representation of the Bhutia-Lepcha community to maintain political stability.
- Constitutional Pragmatism: This example demonstrates the Court’s flexibility in accommodating regional identities within the constitutional framework, promoting peaceful coexistence.
Tripura’s Constitutional Accommodation
- Sixth Schedule (1984): Tripura was included under the Sixth Schedule, granting district and regional councils the power to manage tribal areas and promote autonomy in governance.
- Tripura Accord (1988): This agreement between the Union Government and Tripura National Volunteers (TNV) led to the reservation of one-third of seats in the State Assembly for Scheduled Tribes under Article 332(3B).
- Subrata Acharjee Case (2002): The Supreme Court upheld this reservation, arguing that disproportionate representation was necessary for political inclusion and maintaining stability.
- Power Sharing: As in Sikkim, the Court recognized that adjustments and accommodations were needed to reconcile identities and ensure inclusive governance.
Manipur’s Challenges and Article 371C
- Article 371C: Manipur is governed by Article 371C, which allows for the creation of a Hill Area Committee to represent hill regions, but does not require its approval for key governance decisions.
- Absence of Sixth Schedule: Unlike Nagaland or Tripura, Manipur is not covered by the Sixth Schedule, meaning tribal groups do not enjoy veto powers over legislation affecting their areas.
- Autonomous District Councils: The Manipur Hill Areas Autonomous District Council Act (2000) governs district councils but lacks the extensive powers provided under the Sixth Schedule, contributing to governance challenges.
- Tensions over Representation: Concerns over resource allocation, representation, and perceived dominance by specific communities have heightened social divisions in Manipur, complicating efforts to maintain peace.
Reconciliation and Constitutional Evolution
- R.C. Poudyal’s Perspective: The Supreme Court in the R.C. Poudyal case emphasized that pluralist societies are an outcome of history and cannot be erased. It suggested that adjustments and solutions within democratic systems are essential for long-term stability.
- Constitution as a Living Document: India’s Constitution has shown its capacity to evolve and adapt to regional identities and conflicts. Solutions for reconciling identities must come from within the constitutional framework.
- Future of Manipur: The lessons from Sikkim and Tripura highlight that inclusive governance and accommodating diversity are vital for peace in Manipur. Constitutional solutions must balance representation and resource allocation while respecting the identities of different communities.
Conclusion
The situation in Manipur underscores the challenges of managing diversity in India. By looking at the constitutional accommodations in states like Sikkim and Tripura, we see how power-sharing and inclusive governance have been key to maintaining stability. The Constitution, as a living document, has demonstrated its flexibility in adapting to regional identities, but solutions must be found within its framework. For Manipur, finding constitutional means to address concerns over representation, resources, and identity will be critical for achieving peace and political stability.
Related PYQ
The political and administrative reorganization of states and territories has been a continuous ongoing process since the mid-nineteenth century. Discuss with examples. [ UPSC Civil Services Exam – Mains 2022]
Practice Question
Discuss how the Indian Constitution has evolved to accommodate regional diversity and reconcile identity-based conflicts. What lessons can be drawn from the examples of Sikkim and Tripura in addressing current challenges in Manipur? [250 words]
Guidelines for Answering the Question
- Introduction:
- Briefly introduce the Indian Constitution’s role in managing diversity.
- Mention the importance of special provisions like Article 371 in addressing identity-based conflicts in various states.
- Body:
- Discuss the use of special provisions (e.g., Articles 371F, 371C) to manage regional identities.
- Highlight how the Constitution enables power-sharing and autonomy in governance.
- Explain how Article 371F ensured political stability in Sikkim by protecting the rights of specific communities.
- Describe how the Tripura Accord and Sixth Schedule accommodated tribal identities to restore peace.
- Analyze current challenges in Manipur under Article 371C.
- Suggest how lessons from Sikkim and Tripura, like inclusive governance and power-sharing, could help address Manipur’s tensions.
- Conclusion:
- Summarize the importance of constitutional pragmatism in managing identity-based conflicts.