Mr Ibobi 'Fishing in murky waters'

R Asung *

O Ibobi, the Chief Minister of the India's forgotten State—Manipur—is trying to coin a new idiom of 'fishing in murky waters' and use it as a novel political tool to deal with the current entanglement of Manipur's political mess, instead of his often-used pet strategy of 'fishing in troubled waters'. In English, 'fishing in troubled waters' is a popular idiom-phrase, which means, 'involving in a dangerous situation in the hope of gaining some personal advantage'. Looking at the trajectory of his Government's response to the political turmoil, it has been a game of fishing in troubled waters'.

For 68 days, Manipur was choked and paralysed, due to the economic blockade imposed by All Naga student Association of Manipur (ANSAM) and United Naga Council (UNC) protesting against Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council (Third Amendment) Act, 2008. Just before this blockade, the strike called by the employees of Government of Manipur demanding implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations lasted for about 125 days (from 16.01.10 to 20.05.10).

There is no dearth of agitation and protest in Manipur. Even prior to the employees' strike, there had been mass protest against the Khwairamband Bazaar fake encounter (23.07,2009) exposed by Tehelka, where even students had to join by boycotting classes demanding the resignation of the CM, O Ibobi which also lasted for about 180 days and suspension of classes was from 09.09.10 till 11.01.2010 (122 days). We have also witnessed another strike in Manipur University by the tribal students even vacating campus for about 30 days on the issue of reservations.

Adding up all these protesting days, the GoM under the CM IBOBI has wasted more than one calendar year, not in tackling, but in dragging its feet of clay over the problems. What fails the GoM and the State calls for an honest and in-depth analysis today, by the GoM, the Government of India (GoI) and more importantly, by the political citizens of Manipur. Where have the political trust and the wishes of the general will that have been embodied in the State Sovereignty gone? The State of Manipur was once ruled by the instability of Governments, but today, we are witnessing the worst scenario of the defects of the rigid Anti-Defection Law? But again, principles of 'rule of law' and 'constitutionalism' have been largely written as an obituary in Manipur. Without 'rule of law', a State is tyrannical, and without 'constitutionalism', the State is an imperialist State. Therefore, any analysis seeking political solution should be within the framework of "Rule of Law" and "Constitutionalism".

Why CM, O Ibobi, preferred, 'fishing in murky waters'?

Three issues emerge from the present imbroglio in the melting pot called Manipur.
(i) The ANSAM and UNC imposed economic blockade for 68 days opposing against the MDC Act, on the ground that the GoM was trying to ram the discriminatory Act down the throat of the tribals, and demanded abrogation of the said Act.

(ii) Another issue is the proposed visit of Th Muivah to his ancestral village in Manipur, and showdown of the brazen and arrogant State machinery of GoM opposing it, on one hand, and a grand red carpet-welcome arrangements and mass support rallies by Naga Organisations, on the other hand.

(iii) The NSF completely smothered the lifeline of Manipur by imposing a blanket ban on movement of all the Manipur-registered vehicles protesting against the GoM's decision to restrict their Executives from entering into the State thereby, demanding an unconditional apology from the CM and immediate lifting of 144 CrPC imposed in Naga inhabited areas.

The CM has amalgamated all these three separate issues and has made murky by craftily sandwiching the issue of Th Muivah's proposed visit like a cheese-mayonnaise-spread in between the issues of economic blockade imposed by ANSAM and UNC demanding for abrogation of MDC Act and NSF's demand for CM's apology and lifting of 144CrPC in Naga areas. By sandwiching it, the CM, is 'fishing in murky water' instead of 'fishing in troubled water', and indeed, yielded temporary dividends of :-
(i) capitalising the Meitei communities solid support;
(ii) seducing the Kukis, (and other tribes) to backtrack on its opposition to MDC Act;
(iii) hasty solution of the Sixth Pay demand imbroglio- (ROP);
(iv) earning the sympathy of the Central Congress Party;
(v) tying the hands of the Central Government (especially MHA, engaged in Naga Peace talk);
(vi) insuring his Chief Minister's chair.

But, to find a lasting solution, the already diluted three issues have to be disintegrated and separately resolved, and then only, the present political mess would find its diagnosis and panacea.
1. The Demand for Amendment of the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act (Third Amendment), 2008
In March 1978, the HAC recommended adopting the Sixth Schedule and GoM has also recommended it three times (1991, 1992 and 2001) but added the most controversial words "with local adjustment and amendments". The words could not find its place and meaning in the constitution, and this particular addition spelt the doom of the Sixth Schedule itself. Even the GoI—Ministry of Home Affairs (vide letter dated (21.09.2001) pondered by stating 'several subsequent reminders have sought for clarification regarding the clause/wording with certain local adjustment and amendments'. The fact is that the clause/wording has been done with intention of inserting the MLR/LR Act, so that statutory provision is given to non-tribals to access tribal land (U.A. SHIMRAY, 2007, p.70)

The Third Amendment Act, MDC 2008, came not only with the same defects and shortcomings of the MDC Act, 1971, but with many disguised clauses to disrobe the traditional rights over land, forest, titles and the word "autonomous" (which was inserted in the amendment MDC Act 2000) was chopped off. The writer finds no validity to discuss the said MDC Act 2008, since it draws its (legal) power from a statute (MDC Act 1971) and would always fall short of powers especially financial, which would depend upon the mercy of the State Assembly.

However, the Sixth Schedule that springs its power from the Constitution and its financial allocations from the Union guarantees more hope in empowering local self-government. It is only the tribals of Manipur in the North-East, who are minority in a State, and not under the Sixth Schedule. This is due to antipathy role played by the GoM. There are ugly perceptions and apprehensions that adoption of Sixth Schedule would disintegrate the State.

But, the question is whether the Sixth Schedules implemented in Khasi Hills, Jaintia Hills, the Garo Hills in Meghalaya; the North Cachar Hills, the Karbi Anglong District, the Bodo Territorial Areas District in Assam; and the Tripura Tribal Areas District in Tripura, disintegrated their States. Therefore, the GoM's lackadaisical approach to demand of Sixth Schedule clearly indicates demographic hegemony ambitions of the Meitei-majoritarian Government.

2. Th Muivah's proposed home visit, stiff opposition of GoM and subsequent militarization in Naga areas. Even though the Constitution of India, states in Art.19 (i) d, that 'all citizens shall have the right to move freely throughout the territory of India', and it's guaranteed as a Fundamental Right, the GoM has militarised the Naga Areas with all available forces to stop his entry, contending that :
(i) Th Muivah is a 'Wanted Criminal';
(ii) Th Muivah's visit will lead to communal clash;
(iii) MDC election would be disturbed; etc.

But to dissect in India's Constitutional and legal parlance, it lacks substantial legal supports, because the Indian Passport Act, 1967 Clause6(c) states that issue of Passport shall be refused if 'proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant', then issuance of the Passport, to Th Muivah by the GoI indicates that the power 'to make war and peace' lies with the Union Government and therefore, all criminal charges stands nullified as Th Muivah (NSCN) is engaged in cease-fire and peace talk with GoI.

GOM argues that Th. Muivah's entry would erupt in communal clash but Th.Muivah's proposed route map to Manipur shows no area where there are settlements of mixed-race like Ranchi, Hazaribagh, Biharsarif cities (Hindus and Muslims), where L.K.Advani had planned to undertake his communal Rath Yatra to Bihar, which had to be stopped by Laloo Prasad's government, fearing a Hindu-Muslim communal flare-up. Moreover, Th. Muivah's visit is unlike the communal Rath Yatra of L.K.Advani which shouted anti-muslim slogans (Indu Bharti 1991 'Survival Against Heavy Odds' EPW Jan 19 1991,p1) but as stated by Th. Muivah, "on a peaceful journey to meet my people".

GOM also maintained that Th.Muivah's visit would disturb ADC election but it holds no validity since the CM has already declared that "the Council elections have been conducted successful". In the historic case of Kharak Singh Vs State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court held that 'freedom of living in one's house without disturbance was a part of the concept of personal liberty'. Moreover, the United Nations' Covenant on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Art.13 (1) states that, "Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State". India is a signatory of the Declaration. Therefore, besides the legal and constitutional limitations, the GOM's creation of an artificial self State-sponsored tension is not only unnecessary but also detrimental to the social fabric of Indian Democracy.

3. The Naga Students' Federation (NSF) Protest against GOM

The NSF have called a blanket ban on movement of all Manipur registered vehicles in Nagaland and demanded, 1) unconditional apology from the CM of Manipur for the restrictive decision, 2) lifting of the 144 CrPC imposed in the Naga-inhabited areas. Fortunately, some relief is in the sight, with the temporary lifting of the ban after their meeting with the Prime Minister. As mentioned earlier, immediate solution lays in the deliberation and tackling the three issues -separately and not by making it murky.

CONCLUSION: Besides the 68 days seizure of the State caused by the blockade, the GOM, in its efforts to maintain the political integrity of Manipur, preferred a confrontationist-exclusivist approach which disintegrated Manipur emotionally, socially and psychologically beyond repair. Rather, a dialogue-inclusivist approach should have been taken up. Ignoring the students' potentialities is also another short sightedness. "Most student activism in effect leads to a temporary suspension on the ongoing processing society; the students may not always usher in changes in the direction the desire but can stop undesirable changes.

In this sense students have a veto power"(T.K. Oommen, 2010, p253).Denial of autonomy to the tribal of Manipur construes marginalization of minorities signaling the dichotomy of Central Congress' policy of positive appeasement and the State Congress' policy of marginalization shows a naked double standard.

Handling of Muivah's visit within the framework of " rule of law" and 'constitutionalism' would evaporate the contradiction of Central Government giving him a Z-plus security cover and State Government declaring him a wanted criminal that questions the validity of Article 257(1), which states "the executive powers of every state shall be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the executive power of the Union, and the executive of the Union shall extent to the giving of such directions to a state as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose".

In a nutshell, tackling it as separate problems would be more fruitful, rather than making the problems confusing and murky which may snowballed into more complications. In other words, O.Ibobi, CM of Manipur should rather keep on 'fishing in trouble waters' instead of 'fishing in murky waters' -where no fishes survive.