Virtual attendance in Manipur Assembly: A Question of Constitutional Procedure

The seventh session of the Manipur Legislative Assembly commenced today with some members attending the proceedings through virtual mode. Among those reported to have joined remotely were Deputy Chief Minister Nemcha Kipgen, MLA L M Khoute of 58-Churachandpur, MLA Kimneo Haokip Hangshing of 46-Saikul and MLA Ngursanglur Sanate of 55-Tipaimukh. The session, which began today, is scheduled to conclude on March 17 and will have seven sittings.
The development has raised serious constitutional and procedural questions. According to sources within the Assembly, the existing Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly contain no provision permitting members to attend or participate in proceedings through virtual mode. Nor has any amendment to the rules been made to enable such participation. In the absence of a clear procedural basis, the legitimacy of remote attendance in a legislative sitting becomes a matter of concern.
A State Legislative Assembly in India may theoretically allow virtual participation or hybrid sittings. However, such a step must rest on a clear legal foundation. The functioning of State Legislatures is governed by the Constitution of India, particularly Article 208 of the Constitution of India, which empowers a State Legislature to frame rules regulating its procedure and conduct of business. This constitutional provision implies that any significant procedural change, including permitting remote participation, must be formally incorporated into the Assembly’s rules. Only after such amendment, and with the Speaker’s approval, could a system of virtual attendance acquire procedural legitimacy. Until then, physical presence in the House remains the recognized mode of participation.
Parliamentary practice in India reinforces this position. Neither the Lok Sabha nor the Rajya Sabha has institutionalized virtual participation for full sittings of Parliament. Even during the extraordinary circumstances of the COVID 19 pandemic, Parliament functioned through staggered sittings and altered seating arrangements rather than remote participation. Authoritative parliamentary manuals such as Practice and Procedure of Parliament by M N Kaul and S L Shakdher underline the central principle that legislative deliberations occur with members physically assembled in the House, ensuring quorum, maintaining the authenticity of voting and safeguarding the integrity of debate.
The powers of the Speaker, though extensive, are not unlimited. The Speaker of the Manipur Legislative Assembly has the authority to regulate proceedings and interpret the rules, but these powers operate within the framework of the rules already adopted by the House. The Speaker may issue directions in areas where the rules are silent, yet such directions cannot ordinarily override established procedural requirements. Fundamental changes in legislative procedure—such as allowing members to participate virtually—would require either a specific rule or a resolution adopted by the Assembly.
In the absence of such a provision, the participation of members through virtual mode inevitably invites scrutiny. Questions arise regarding whether such participation can be counted for quorum, whether members joining remotely can validly engage in debates or voting, and whether legislative decisions taken under such circumstances can withstand procedural examination.
The issue assumes added significance as the current session of the twelfth Assembly will hold seven sittings before concluding on March 17. Should legislative business, including debates or passage of bills, proceed with members attending virtually without an explicit procedural framework, the matter could provoke wider debate among constitutional experts and parliamentary practitioners.
Legislatures are institutions governed as much by convention as by written law. Any departure from established procedure, even when prompted by administrative convenience, demands careful consideration. The introduction of virtual participation in the Assembly without formal amendment of its rules risks blurring the boundaries of constitutional procedure. At a time when democratic institutions rely heavily on adherence to established norms, the question is not merely about technology or convenience, but about preserving the procedural integrity of the legislative process.