Why PR in Manipur?

It will soon be two years since the fateful night of 3 May 2023, when life in Manipur shattered. What began as a sudden exodus of families fleeing their homes in search of safety soon morphed into a never-ending crisis, displacing over60,000 people. As days turned into months, the harsh reality became undeniable: What was lost may never return. And if it can, as the central government keeps promising, then how long must that take, is the question. The clash between the Kuki Zo and Meitei communities that erupted in May2023 was not an isolated event. It was the culmination of deep-rooted ethnic tensions that had long been simmering beneath the surface, fuelled by political, social, and economic disparity.
Despite multiple interventions, committees, and inquiries launched by the government, the crisis only deepened. Today, the prospect of peace and justice remains elusive. In the immediate aftermath of the violence, a Peace Committee was swiftly formed in June 2023, chaired by then-governor Anusuiya Uikey. The committee was tasked with nurturing dialogue between the Kuki Zo and Meitei people. Its members were a mix of politicians, former civil servants, and social leaders—individuals seen as capable of mediating between the warring groups. However, the initiative struggled to gain traction. A central point of contention was the inclusion of chief minister N Biren Singh, which raised questions about the impartiality of the process. Rather than signalling a path toward peace, the committee highlighted the government’s failure to comprehend the complexities of the crisis.
A Commission of Inquiry was formed in July, led by Ajai Lamba, the former Chief Justice of the Guwahati High Court. It was tasked with investigating the underlying causes of the violence, the authorities’ failure to prevent bloodshed, and the lapses in governance that allowed such a situation to escalate. It was also mandated to address accountability within the government and law enforcement bodies, ensuring that no stone was left unturned. People hoped that this would be a step toward real accountability—a chance to identify those responsible for the violence and hold them accountable. What was initially meant to be a thorough inquiry, to be wrapped up by November 2024, has now been pushed to May 2025. This has only added to Manipur’s months-long frustration. As the deadline stretches further into the future, the lack of tangible progress becomes even more apparent. The delays highlight not only the bureaucratic inefficiencies at play but also the complete lack of urgency on an issue that should have been the top priority. If the inquiry was so complex, why wasn’t a mechanism put in place to fast-track it? It is clearly evident that the issue has been side-lined.
In August, a three-member panel was formed days after the video showing women being paraded naked surfaced, described as “deeply disturbing” by the Supreme Court. This special committee was to oversee the relief, rehabilitation, and compensation efforts for the victims of the violence. It was led by Gita Mittal, former Chief Justice of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court. With her extensive experience in handling human rights issues, especially in conflict zones, Justice Mittal’s leadership had inspired hope. Joining her were Justice Pushpa V Ganediwala and Justice Anjana Prakash, who brought a wealth of legal expertise to the table.
Once again, the people of Manipur anxiously awaited this intervention, hoping it would lead to real, effective change. However, despite the committee’s tireless efforts, the relief process faced significant delays. Bureaucratic hurdles and confusion over compensation criteria further slowed progress. While the committee’s work was seen as a turning point, the slow implementation left many victims still waiting for the justice and relief they desperately sought. Compounding the frustration was the confusion surrounding the methodology used in quantifying losses and compensating them. The scale of destruction was so vast that it was nearly impossible to calculate the true extent of the damage. How do you quantify the loss of a home, a community, a life upended overnight? No bureaucratic system had the answer. And how could anyone assign value to the emotional toll—to the severing of deep-rooted ties, to the trauma that fractured hundreds of families? There was also the practical dilemma: Who would qualify for compensation? And what would be the criteria for relief?
Not all losses are of the same value. How do you measure the loss of large business enterprises compared to single–bedroom houses? Or, for that matter, a five-story home versus a smaller structure? How do you assess the value of materials left behind, such as cash, gold, and other valuables? These complexities present significant challenges when calculating the true cost of destruction. The committee’s mandate, while well-intentioned, became entangled in these problems, and as a result, the people of Manipur found themselves stuck in a limbo of unfulfilled promises yet again. Manipur’s hopes from the committee turned into a bitter disillusionment. The government had failed to deliver on its commitments.
In December 2024, a significant shift in political leadership brought back a glimmer of hope. Former Union Home Secretary Ajay Kumar Bhalla was brought in as the new governor amid much speculation. People hoped his administrative expertise would result in decisive actions. Would his leadership finally break the long-standing cycle of ineffective governance and be the turning point Manipur needed? In August 2023, many speculated whether the President’s Rule would be imposed to address what the Supreme Court called an “absolute breakdown of law-and-order machinery”. However, no befitting action was taken; leaving the people in a state of shock and disbelief. Yet, there is now a sense of cautious optimism. The people of Manipur still hope that Bhalla might be the man who could steer the state out of its turmoil. His past experience in handling national security issues and his role in the home ministry give the impression that he could approach the crisis with a level-headed, practical manner. Can one individual, even with considerable experience, truly address the deep-seated issues that caused such suffering in Manipur? The challenge seems insurmountable, and doubts linger. After all, Bhalla has been a part of the broader system that has failed Manipur for so long.
The people of Manipur, weary from decades of violence and upheaval, wonder whether Bhalla’s leadership will mark a change from the history of governmental neglect. Their frustration deepens as they continue to wait for answers. Where is the subsistence allowance that should have been provided immediately? Was there any proactive effort to track the number of people who fled? Or to understand how they were surviving every day in far-flung cities outside the Northeast? Was there even a system in place to identify those quietly suffering from mental trauma? In the absence of these essential supports, especially for those displaced outside the Northeast, people have been left without homes, jobs, or a stable income. Even their basic human rights are being ignored. For the people of Manipur, this drives home the bitter truth that they are not a priority for the Centre. However, the inaction isn’t just restricted to the displaced. Equally responsible are the political leaders who have consistently overlooked the needs of their own people. Decades of neglect, misgovernance, and Imphal-centric development—not leaving much for the hill-dwellers—are deeper issues that seldom surfaced. Further, when the central government addresses peace talks, it glosses over the fact that they should have happened long before the violence reached the magnitude it eventually did. Its reactive stance is emblematic of its failure to understand the urgency of the situation.
Equally troubling is the contradiction between the Centre’s promises of equality and its treatment of its own citizens. The hypocrisy—where promises of equality are accompanied by discriminatory actions betrays the government’s larger failure in Manipur. And then, there are the loud voices asserting that the warring communities in Manipur must resolve their differences themselves. If this were truly the solution, the crisis would not have escalated to such catastrophic levels. There is an urgent need for a committed, neutral mediator. There must be sustained, focused attention on Manipur. Amid these committees, inquiries, and high-profile appointments, a disturbing thought lingers: Is the government simply waiting for the people of Manipur to grow weary of protesting? Is the strategy simply to outlast the victims of violence, hoping that their demands for justice will eventually fade into silence?
Four days after N. Biren Singh resigned as chief minister of Manipur, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) notified imposition of President’s Rule in the state under Article 356 of the Constitution, keeping the Assembly in suspended animation as ruling party despite a round of meetings, the party could not come up with a consensus CM candidate, who will be acceptable to both the Meiteis and Kukis. So “the only other option in such a scenario was the imposition of President’s Rule with suspended animation. With the imposition of President’s Rule, the Centre hastaken over all functioning of the state government except that of the legislature. The President’s Rule has to be approved by Parliament within two months of the notification. “In the meantime, the governor can explore the possibility of an alternate government being formed. This has to be done at the earliest as the Assembly can’t remain in suspended animation indefinitely as all legislative work including passing of the budget comes to a standstill. If an alternate government cannot be formed at the earliest, the Governor will have to inform the President, who can then decide to dissolve the Assembly. In such an eventuality, fresh elections will have to be held. In the case of Manipur, with N. Biren Singh stepping down, the elected government ceases to exist. There is no government in place now. So, no session can be held. The gap of six months required between two sessions becomes inoperative in such a situation.” The 7th session of the 12th Manipur Assembly was scheduled to begin on 10 February. But after Biren stepped down Sunday the 9th February, evening, Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla declared the session that was to commence from February 10 “null and void with immediate effect”. The Presidential proclamation under Article 356 is issued after the Union Cabinet led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi approves it and imposed PR on 13th February 2025.
But silence in the face of suffering is not peace. It is not reconciliation. It is despair. The people of Manipur may be exhausted, but their exhaustion does not signal a return to normalcy. It signals the erosion of hope, a dangerous void that will be far harder to repair than any physical destruction.
(Writer can be reached at:[email protected])