President's Rule in Manipur: Centre's Dilemma and Constitutional Implications
Centre considers extending President's Rule in Manipur amid ongoing instability.
Photo by John Cameron
Key Facts
President's Rule imposed: Manipur
Article invoked: Article 356
Extension requires: Parliamentary approval every 6 months
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Federal Structure, Constitutional Provisions
Connects to syllabus areas of Emergency Provisions, Centre-State Relations
Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical questions on federalism
Visual Insights
Manipur: Areas Affected by Ethnic Violence and President's Rule
Map showing the location of Manipur and highlighting the areas most affected by the ethnic violence that led to the imposition of President's Rule. The map also indicates key cities and districts.
Loading interactive map...
More Information
Background
The imposition of President's Rule in India has its roots in the Government of India Act, 1935, which provided for provincial autonomy but also reserved powers for the Governor-General to intervene in provincial affairs. Post-independence, Article 356 was incorporated into the Constitution, drawing inspiration from Section 93 of the 1935 Act. The initial debates in the Constituent Assembly saw concerns raised about its potential misuse, with many members fearing it could undermine federalism.
The first instance of President's Rule was in Punjab in 1951. Over the decades, its application has been a subject of intense debate and judicial scrutiny, particularly regarding the grounds for its invocation and the extent of central control. The Sarkaria Commission (1983-1988) and the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000-2002) both recommended safeguards against its arbitrary use, emphasizing that it should be a measure of last resort.
Latest Developments
Recent years have witnessed a decline in the frequency of President's Rule, partly due to stricter judicial interpretation and increased political awareness of its potential for misuse. The Supreme Court's landmark judgment in the S.R. Bommai case (1994) established clear guidelines for its invocation, emphasizing that the proclamation is subject to judicial review and that the floor of the Assembly is the ultimate test of a government's majority.
Despite these safeguards, debates continue regarding the role of Governors in assessing the political situation in states and their recommendations for President's Rule. Future trends suggest a greater emphasis on cooperative federalism and exploring alternative mechanisms for resolving political crises in states, such as inter-state councils and enhanced dialogue between the Centre and state governments. The focus is shifting towards strengthening state autonomy and promoting collaborative governance.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding Article 356 of the Constitution of India: 1. It empowers the President to proclaim President's Rule in a state if the constitutional machinery has failed. 2. The proclamation requires approval by both Houses of Parliament within two months. 3. President's Rule can be extended indefinitely with parliamentary approval every six months. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: D
All three statements are correct. Article 356 deals with President's Rule, requires parliamentary approval within two months, and can be extended with six-monthly approvals.
2. In the context of the imposition of President's Rule, which of the following statements is NOT correct?
- A.The Governor of the state submits a report to the President recommending the imposition of President's Rule.
- B.The President can impose President's Rule even without a report from the Governor.
- C.During President's Rule, the Parliament can enact laws on the State List.
- D.The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review over the imposition of President's Rule.
Show Answer
Answer: B
The President generally acts on the report of the Governor. While the President has discretionary powers, imposing President's Rule without any input from the Governor is highly unusual and subject to judicial scrutiny.
3. Which of the following commissions/committees has specifically addressed the issue of misuse of Article 356 and recommended safeguards?
- A.The Balwant Rai Mehta Committee
- B.The Sarkaria Commission
- C.The Ashok Mehta Committee
- D.The Finance Commission
Show Answer
Answer: B
The Sarkaria Commission (1983-1988) specifically addressed Centre-State relations and recommended safeguards against the misuse of Article 356.
4. Assertion (A): Prolonging President's Rule in a state can be viewed as an infringement on the principles of federalism. Reason (R): Article 356 allows the Union government to directly administer a state, potentially undermining the autonomy of the state government. In the context of the above, which of the following is correct?
- A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
- B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
- C.A is true, but R is false.
- D.A is false, but R is true.
Show Answer
Answer: A
Both the assertion and the reason are true, and the reason correctly explains why prolonging President's Rule can be seen as an infringement on federalism.