Context

• The recent surge in violence in Manipur has spotlighted constitutional challenges in managing internal conflicts, especially regarding the state's governance and security.
• Reports indicate that the Chief Minister of Manipur has been sidelined from critical security operations and the invocation of Article 355, a constitutional provision that mandates the Union to protect states from internal disturbances and external threats, further emphasises the gravity of the situation.
• These developments bring into focus the failure of constitutional mechanisms in addressing the underlying identitarian tensions, thus questioning the document’s capacity to manage diversity effectively.

The Role of Constitution’s Special Provisions in Managing Diversity

• Unique Provisions for Various States
  • India’s Constitution is designed with unique provisions to manage its vast diversity.
  • Various states, such as Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, and Sikkim, have been accorded special provisions under the Constitution.
  • These provisions aim to balance equitable development and safeguard cultural identities, particularly in regions with significant tribal populations or socio-political complexities.
  • In a country as diverse as India, federalism is not merely a governance model but a necessity to ensure unity while respecting differences.
• Institutionalisation of Power Sharing Mechanism
  • The Constitution has evolved over time to accommodate the distinct needs of India's northeastern states, characterised by complex ethnic compositions and competing identities.
  • These special provisions often institutionalise power-sharing mechanisms, representation in governance, and cultural autonomy, helping to promote political stability.
  • However, the rising tensions and discontent in Manipur suggest that these measures are either insufficient or inadequately implemented in the state.

Case Studies of Constitutional Accommodation and Peace Building Through Special Provisions

• The Case of Constitutional Accommodation in Sikkim
  • Inclusion of Article 371F
    • Sikkim’s accession to India in 1975 brought about the inclusion of Article 371F, which provided special constitutional safeguards to the state.
    • One of the key features of this article was the empowerment of Parliament to protect the rights and interests of different sections of Sikkim's population.
    • By recognising the unique socio-political history of Sikkim, this provision allowed for power-sharing arrangements that catered to the distinct cultural identities of communities like the Bhutia-Lepcha.
    • For example, the Representation of Peoples Act of 1951 was amended to reserve seats for different communities in the state legislature, ensuring their voices were adequately represented.
  • SC Judgement on Constitutionality of Article 371F
    • In the landmark R.C. Poudyal case (1993), the constitutionality of Article 371F was challenged, with arguments that the increased representation of certain communities went against the principle of proportional reservation.
    • The Supreme Court, however, upheld the provision, reasoning that historical and cultural considerations justified the arrangement.
    • This judgment was significant because it recognised that reconciling diversity sometimes requires deviations from strict proportionality, allowing for greater flexibility in governance structures to maintain stability.
• The Case of Constitution Peace Building in Tripura
  • Extension of Sixth Schedule to Tripura and Introduction of Tripura Accord
    • The state of Tripura offers another instructive example of how constitutional frameworks can be used to broker peace in conflict-ridden areas.
    • The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for tribal autonomy, was extended to Tripura through the 49th Constitutional Amendment in 1984.
    • The implementation of this schedule allowed the tribal population greater legislative autonomy, particularly concerning education, social customs, and land rights.
    • This power-sharing arrangement, cemented by the Tripura Accord of 1988, helped to bring an end to the insurgency movement led by the Tripura National Volunteers (TNV).
  • SC Judgement on Disproportionate Reservation Through Tripura Accord
    • The disproportionate reservation of seats for Scheduled Tribes in Tripura’s State Assembly, enacted under Article 332(3B), was challenged in the Subrata Acharjee case (2002).
    • The SC upheld the reservation scheme, emphasising that the political stability achieved through the Tripura Accord justified the deviation from strict proportional representation.
    • This case reinforced the idea that constitutional accommodations, tailored to the specific historical and socio-political contexts of states, can play a vital role in conflict resolution.

An Analysis of Manipur’s Constitutional Dilemmas

• Lack of Sixth Schedule Autonomy
  • Manipur is governed under Article 371C, which provides for the creation of a Hill Area Committee (HAC) to represent the interests of the tribal areas.
  • However, the powers granted to this committee are significantly weaker than those provided under the Sixth Schedule.
    • The Sixth Schedule offers tribal regions a degree of legislative and administrative autonomy.
    • It establishes Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) with powers to make laws on land use, management of forests, regulation of social customs, and even village administration.
  • The HAC can provide recommendations on matters related to tribal areas, but its approval is not required for decisions affecting these regions.
  • This limited autonomy creates a feeling of disenfranchisement among the tribal population in Manipur, who view the lack of robust constitutional safeguards as evidence of neglect.
• The Manipur Hill Areas Autonomous District Council Act, 2000: Inadequate Representation
  • Unlike the Sixth Schedule provisions in other northeastern states, this act does not grant the councils significant legislative or executive authority.
  • Although membership in the district councils is based on tribal classification, these councils lack the power to make substantial decisions concerning governance, resource allocation, and development in their areas.
  • This limitation is in stark contrast to states like Nagaland and Mizoram, where tribal councils have more comprehensive control over local governance and development.
• Inefficiencies in the Current Governing Framework: Power Imbalance
  • The underlying issue is that the current framework fails to adequately address the complex ethnic divisions in Manipur.
  • The state’s population is divided primarily between the Meitei, who live in the Imphal valley, and various Naga and Kuki tribes, who inhabit the surrounding hill areas.
  • The valley comprises about 10% of the state’s land area but holds a majority of the population, while the hill areas, which make up 90% of the state’s territory, are predominantly inhabited by the tribal communities.
  • This geographical and demographic divide has significant political implications, as it exacerbates existing tensions over land ownership, resource distribution, and political representation.

Possible Solutions to Address Manipur’s Constitution Dilemmas

• In the context of Manipur, constitutional mechanisms need to be revisited and strengthened to address the state’s complex identity-based conflicts.
• One possible solution for Manipur lies in extending the provisions of the Sixth Schedule, which has successfully facilitated peace in Tripura and other northeastern states.
• Additionally, greater political autonomy for tribal communities, including enhanced powers for the Hill Area Committee and District Councils, could help address long-standing grievances over governance and representation.
• Ensuring equitable resource allocation and developing a more inclusive political framework are essential steps toward building lasting peace.

Conclusion

• The recent unrest in Manipur highlights the limitations of the current constitutional framework in managing the state’s deep-rooted identity conflicts.
• While the Indian Constitution has successfully reconciled diversity in states like Sikkim and Tripura through special provisions, Manipur’s experience shows that these accommodations must be continuously reassessed and adapted.
• The ultimate challenge for India is to ensure that its federal structure, strengthened by constitutional safeguards, is flexible enough to address the specific needs of its most diverse regions.