In a speech delivered at the City Convention Center on Thursday, Manipur’s Chief Minister N. Biren Singh issued a stern admonition to social media users, cautioning them against ridiculing and mocking leaders or producing speeches or videos deemed inappropriate for public consumption. He highlighted the proficiency of social media users in creating such content and warned of potential arrests, asserting the government’s capability to enforce this. Chief Minister Singh remarked on the recurring protests following arrests, where individuals claimed their freedom of speech and expression was under threat. He stated: “Now, we have started considering arresting them quietly, finding the means. When arrested, they say the freedom of speech has been targeted. So, we consider arresting them silently and beating them,” he said. Adding to this, he mentioned that he had been advised to sanction such measures but had refrained from doing so, thus purportedly protecting these individuals from such actions.
This commentary serves as a stark warning to the people of Manipur, particularly those critical of the government, suggesting that even if legal avenues do not permit the arrest of those exercising their freedom of speech, alternative, extrajudicial methods could be employed. Implicit in his statement was a threat to deploy goons to abduct and assault dissenters. Such rhetoric underscores an intolerance towards criticism and an inability to address the government’s shortcomings, resorting instead to intimidation tactics. No wonder, Mr. Biren has garnered notoriety for his crackdown on social media critics. This has also become a subject of ridicule among the populace, who have lambasted his inability to apprehend those responsible for the ongoing violence in Manipur.
In his speech, Mr. Biren also drew a controversial parallel between the current unrest in Manipur and natural calamities, emphasizing their unpredictability. He audaciously suggested that those suffering in relief camps, having lost their homes, would receive divine rewards, and that the state would ultimately benefit from the deaths and sufferings caused by the violence. Such comparisons, including likening the situation to the Israel-Hamas conflict and the Russo-Ukrainian war, trivialize the conflict, framing it as a war rather than an internal strife between communities. If the violence in Manipur were truly a war orchestrated by external militants, the question arises why India, boasting one of the world’s most powerful militaries, is unable to quell it.
The Chief Minister’s remarks betray a failure to acknowledge the shortcomings of the intelligence department and his own inability to control the situation. Rather than merely proclaiming “trying our best,” he must demonstrate his efforts through rational and effective measures. A competent government, and a capable Chief Minister, should possess the humility to recognize their deficiencies and strive towards solutions. In a democracy, it is the public who holds the ultimate authority, and criticism is an essential mechanism to compel a failing government to improve. It is disheartening that the Chief Minister’s response to critique is to contemplate the suppression of dissent rather than addressing the root causes of the unrest.
This pattern of arresting critics, especially those active on social media, has led to a pervasive atmosphere of fear and self-censorship among the populace. The CM’s inability to confront and address the genuine grievances of the citizens, choosing instead to silence dissent, only exacerbates the prevailing discontent. In democratic societies, the essence of governance lies in the ability to engage with the citizenry, to listen, to understand, and to act upon the legitimate concerns of the people. Mr. Biren’s approach, however, appears to be one of authoritarianism, cloaked under the guise of maintaining order. The Chief Minister’s audacious remarks equating the state’s turmoil to global conflicts not only trivialize the local strife but also divert attention from the government’s failures. Such comparisons serve as a smokescreen, masking the underlying issues of mismanagement and the administration’s inability to foster communal harmony. By comparing Manipur’s unrest to international wars, Mr. Biren attempts to elevate the situation to a geopolitical scale, thereby absolving his government of direct responsibility.
Moreover, his suggestion that divine rewards will compensate for the suffering endured by those in relief camps is not only insensitive but also highlights a disconnection from the immediate needs and realities of the affected populace. The government’s role is to provide tangible support and solutions, not to defer responsibility to higher powers. The Chief Minister’s admission of contemplating extrajudicial measures to deal with dissenters is a grave concern. Such an approach undermines the rule of law and sets a dangerous precedent for governance. It is imperative for leaders to uphold the principles of justice and equality, ensuring that all actions taken are within the legal framework and respect the fundamental rights of individuals.
What’s the point of even addressing those who criticize him and his government when his primary focus should be finding solutions and restoring peace? If the government has failed to control violence for over 14 months, what can the people be expected to do? Applaud thunderously? Biren’s failures to manage the situation seem to have compounded further failures. For others, failures are the pillars of success; but for Biren, failures are the pillars of more failures.
Silencing Dissent: CM N Biren Singh’s assault on free speech in Manipur
351
previous post