In a democracy, leaders derive their legitimacy from transparency, accountability, and the trust they build with the public. However, recent events surrounding the alleged demand for resignation of Manipur Chief Minister N. Biren Singh reveal a troubling pattern of misinformation, political U-turns, and deliberate obfuscation. These actions not only cast doubt on the integrity of the political process but also suggest an environment where truth is elusive, and leaders can evade accountability without consequence.
Reports circulated that several MLAs and ministers had demanded Biren Singh’s resignation, triggering political speculation and public anticipation of a leadership change. However, as quickly as these reports emerged, the narrative shifted. Some of the very politicians who were initially cited as calling for his resignation publicly denied any such move. Instead of providing clarity, these denials have only deepened the public’s skepticism. Was there a genuine attempt to oust the Chief Minister, or was this merely a ploy to manipulate public perception and internal power dynamics?
This cycle of contradictory statements reflects a worrying trend where both politicians and media outlets engage in half-truths or unsourced reporting, contributing to confusion. It is one thing for political players to change their stances behind closed doors, but when the media participates in spreading inconsistent narratives, it undermines public trust. Journalism is meant to serve as a check on power by providing citizens with facts. When news becomes unreliable or tainted with political interests, it weakens the foundation of democracy.
However, the heart of the issue goes beyond inconsistent messaging. Manipur’s political culture seems to operate under an unspoken rule: the truth may be visible, but it is not to be uttered aloud. This aligns with the metaphor of the emperor’s new clothes—where everyone knows that the emperor is naked, but no one dares to say it out loud for fear of retribution or alienation. In Manipur, despite knowing the realities of political dysfunction and governance failures, those within and outside the political system often choose silence. The fear of political backlash, loss of power, or even personal safety makes it easier to remain complicit than to demand accountability.
This silence not only emboldens political leaders to engage in mismanagement but also erodes the legitimacy of leadership itself. When those in power can make contradictory claims without consequences, they signal that they are beyond public scrutiny. Leadership that is built on such shifting sands of truth ceases to command respect. Yet, in a place like Manipur, this lack of legitimacy seems to have become normalized. Political survival and opportunism appear to take precedence over principles of good governance, leaving the public disillusioned and disconnected from the political process.
The public, too, shares some responsibility. A disengaged citizenry allows this culture of unaccountability to thrive. If people do not demand clarity and truth from their leaders, the political class will have no incentive to change. However, in a state grappling with ethnic tensions, insecurity, and deep-rooted divisions, people may feel that raising their voices would invite unnecessary trouble. This creates a vicious cycle where silence feeds illegitimacy, and illegitimacy fuels further silence.
Biren Singh’s resignation row is not just a fleeting political drama but a symptom of a larger malaise. It exposes how political manipulation and media complicity can distort public discourse and prevent genuine accountability. The real question is whether Manipur can break free from this cycle of ambiguity and demand the kind of leadership it deserves. For that to happen, both the political class and the public need to adopt a culture of honesty and accountability—where leaders are held to their promises, and citizens refuse to tolerate deceit, even if it comes at a personal or political cost.
Media and Politicians: Politics of U-turns and the Silence of Accountability
90