Will Manipur be put under President's Rule? Know under which conditions it is imposed

Over 100 people have lost their lives in the ethnic violence in Manipur, which has been continuing for more than a month now. Clashes first broke out on May 3 after a 'Tribal Solidarity March' was organised in the hill districts of Manipur to protest against the Meitei community's demand for Scheduled Tribe (ST) status.

Meiteis account for about 53 per cent of Manipur's population and live mostly in the Imphal Valley. Tribals - Nagas and Kukis - constitute another 40 per cent of the population and reside in the hill districts.

Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh on Monday warned people that they will have to face the consequences if they do not stop violence in the state.

He was reacting to the injury suffered by an Army soldier after unidentified men resorted to unprovoked firing in Imphal West district on Sunday night.

“Stop it (violence). Otherwise, they will face the consequences. I also appeal to the people... Meitei people who are with arms ... not to attack anything and maintain peace so that we can restore normalcy in the state.”

President Rule: What our Constitution says

Part XVIII of the Constitution speaks of emergency provisions. The emergency provisions therein can be classified into three categories: (a) Articles 352, 353, 354, 358 and 359 which relate to emergency proper - if we can use that expression, (b) Articles 355, 356 and 357 which deal with the imposition of President's rule in States in a certain situation and (c) Article 360 which speaks of financial emergency.

Article 352(1) says that "If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby the security of India or of any part of the territory thereof is threatened, whether by war or external aggression or armed rebellion, he may, by proclamation, make a declaration to that effect in respect of the whole of India or of such part of the territory thereof as may be specified in the proclamation". The words "in respect of the whole of India ... in the proclamation" were added by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976 while the words "armed rebellion" were substituted by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978 for the words "internal disturbance". In this paper we do not propose to deal with the emergency of the kind contemplated by article 352. Indeed no such emergency has been proclaimed after 1977. In any event, we think that the article as amended by the 44th Amendment Act eliminates any room for abuse and needs no further change. Similarly, we need not deal with article 360, financial emergency, in as much as no defect or inadequacy therein has been brought to our notice. The said article has not also been invoked till date. We would thus be dealing only with the power of the President to impose the President's rule in the States as provided in Article 356.

Article 356 carries the marginal heading "Provisions in case of failure of constitutional machinery in States". But neither clause (1) nor for that matter any other clause in the article employs the expression "failure of constitutional machinery". On the other hand, the words used are similar to those occurring in

Article 355, namely, "a situation has arisen in which the government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution". If the President is satisfied that such a situation has

arisen, whether on the basis of a report received from the Governor of the State or otherwise, he may, by proclamation, take any or all of the three steps mentioned in sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c). It would be appropriate to read the entire clause (1) of article 356 at this stage:

"(1) If the President, on receipt of a report from the Governor of a State or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by Proclamation –

(a) assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Government of the State and all or any of the powers vested in or exercisable by the Governor or any body or authority in the State other than the Legislature of the State;

(b) declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament;

(c) make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the President to be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation, including provisions for suspending in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of this Constitution relating to anybody or authority in the State:

Provided that nothing in this clause shall authorize the President to assume to himself any of the powers vested in or exercisable by a High Court, or to suspend in whole or in part the operation of any provision of this Constitution relating to High Courts.".