Merger Agreement invalid : PREPAK
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, September 27 2011: The proscribed PREPAK has declared that the Merger Agreement signed between king Budhachandra and the Government of India on September 21, 1949 at Shillong is an invalid document.

At that time, Manipur was an independent nation ruled by elected representatives.

The Manipur State Legislative Assembly formed by 53 elected representatives with MK Priyobarta as Chief Minister in its 3rd session held on September 28, 1949 declared that the Merger Agreement had no legitimacy as the king was only a nominal head having no constitutional power to sign such agreement, the outfit stated in a press release issued by its assistant secretary, publicity and propaganda Leibakngakpa Luwang.

After the Anglo-Manipur war of 1891, Manipur remained under British occupation for 56 years.

At the end of the World War II, many colonised countries like Burma, India, Kangleipak (Manipur), Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Bhutan became independent.

However, the newly independent India, after mastering all the art and tactics of expansionism and colonialism during the long 400 years under British occupation, embarked on renewed process of colonising smaller countries located in its neighbourhood.

The then leaders of India particularly Sadar Vallabhai Patel, Jawaharlal Nehru, VP Menon and Prakasa were the architects of this expansionist policy.

It was under this policy, king Budhachandra was called to Shillong and forced to sign on the pre-drafted Merger Agreement at gun point on September 21, 1949 .

Alleging that Kangleipak was forced to merge into imperialist India, PREPAK asserted that the people of Kangleipak would never deceitful act of India and they would always opposed the validity of the Merger Agreement.

Though India claimed that Manipur joined the Indian Union on its own accord, international laws clearly proved that it was annexation.

Article 8 of the Vienna Convention on Laws of Treaties clearly laid down that any treaty signed by nominal head of State having no constitutional power is invalid and carries no legitimacy.

Law experts are of the opinion that any treaty signed by any individual against the norms and constitution of his/her country should be rejected and defied.

The Manipur Constitution Act 1947 never authorised the king who was only nominal head of the State then, to sign any treaty on behalf of the nation with another country.

It is a fact that the king had no administrative powers after a popular republican Government was set up in Kangleipak.

King Budhachandra wrote repeatedly to the then Governor of Assam Prakash explaining that he had surrendered all the political power to the Assembly and the people.

A few minutes before he was to meet king Budhachandra, Prakash discussed in detail about the plot they were hatching with Sadar Patel who was then undergoing treatment at Birla House, Bombay.

The letter wrote by Prakash to Sadar Patel on September 18, 1949 testified that Budhachandra was forced to sign the Merger Agreement under duress after keeping him under house arrest.

The same agreement was kept in secrecy for some days without making it public.

Later VP Menon claimed that Manipur was merged into India in view of being a border state, and also to bring speedy development.

Going by the logic of VP Menon, the USA which has marched ahead of other countries in terms of development has all the rights to annex all the countries of the world.

Again when some countries are annexed, one or the other of the remaining countries would be rendered a border state, the outfit remarked.

It is crystal clear that annexation of Manipur by India was illegal and that it violated all the relevant international laws, it added.

Comment