The Hindu: Published on 17th Feb 2025:
Why in News?
President’s Rule was imposed in Manipur on February 13, 2024, after the resignation of Chief Minister N. Biren Singh. The state had been facing severe ethnic violence between Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities since May 2023, leading to over 250 deaths and the displacement of more than 60,000 people. The demand for Scheduled Tribe (ST) status by the Meitei community led to clashes, and the political instability worsened when the BJP leadership failed to agree on a successor after Singh stepped down. Given the governance breakdown, the Union government invoked Article 356, placing the state under President’s Rule.
What is President’s Rule?
President’s Rule, also known as State Emergency or Constitutional Emergency, is imposed when a state government fails to function according to constitutional provisions. The President of India, based on a report from the Governor or other sources, issues a proclamation to take over the administration of the state. When this happens, the state executive (Chief Minister and Council of Ministers) is dismissed, and Parliament assumes legislative powers for the state. The Governor administers the state on behalf of the President, often with advisors or bureaucrats handling governance.
Once imposed, the proclamation must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within two months. If approved, it remains in force for six months, with further extensions requiring fresh approval. The maximum duration is three years, but extensions beyond one year require an ongoing National Emergency or an Election Commission recommendation stating that elections in the state cannot be conducted.
What Does the Constitution Say?
The Indian Constitution (Part XVIII) provides for three types of emergencies:
National Emergency (Article 352) – Declared when India or any part of its territory faces war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. This has been declared three times in history, including during the 1975 Emergency under Indira Gandhi.
State Emergency (Article 356) – Declared when the constitutional machinery of a state breaks down, as seen in Manipur’s case.
Financial Emergency (Article 360) – Declared when the financial stability of India is threatened, though it has never been invoked.
In Manipur, Article 356 was invoked due to political instability and ongoing violence. This follows the Union’s duty under Article 355, which obligates the Central government to protect states from internal disturbances and ensure that governance follows constitutional norms.
How is President’s Rule Different from National Emergency?
A National Emergency under Article 352 is imposed when India’s security is threatened due to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. Unlike President’s Rule, which only affects a particular state, a National Emergency applies to the entire country or a specific region.
During a National Emergency, the fundamental rights under Article 19 (freedom of speech, assembly, etc.) are suspended, and Parliament gains power to legislate on state subjects. In contrast, President’s Rule does not impact fundamental rights but removes the elected state government and suspends the legislature. In Manipur, the state assembly has been placed under "suspended animation", meaning it is temporarily paused but can be revived if the situation stabilizes.
Another key difference is in approval requirements. President’s Rule requires only a simple majority in Parliament, whereas a National Emergency requires a special majority and has no time limit.
Has President’s Rule Been Misused?
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar had initially hoped that Article 356 would remain a “dead letter” and only be used in exceptional cases. However, history shows that it has been invoked 134 times across 29 states and Union Territories since 1950. The first use was in Punjab in 1951, and it has often been used as a political tool rather than just a crisis-management mechanism.
Manipur and Uttar Pradesh have seen President’s Rule imposed 11 times each, with Manipur’s latest imposition bringing its total to 11 instances. The longest period of President’s Rule was in Jammu & Kashmir, lasting over 12 years due to insurgency and security concerns. Other states, including Punjab and Puducherry, have also witnessed extended periods under Article 356.
The S.R. Bommai case (1994) was a landmark judgment in checking the misuse of President’s Rule. The Supreme Court ruled that the power under Article 356 is not absolute and is subject to judicial review. The Court held that the Union government cannot arbitrarily dismiss state governments for political reasons. It also stated that Parliament must approve President’s Rule before dissolving a state assembly, ensuring procedural safeguards.
Key Takeaways from Manipur’s Case:
- President's rule was imposed due to the resignation of the Chief Minister and political instability.
- The Central Government took over the administration of the state under Article 356 of the Constitution.
- The move was taken because the government was unable to function due to the violence.
- The state assembly was not dissolved but placed in "suspended animation" so that it could be reactivated when stability was restored.
- President's rule has been misused for political purposes many times in the history of India, but now the Supreme Court has kept a strict watch on it.
President’s Rule remains a controversial yet necessary provision in the Indian Constitution. While it provides a mechanism to handle crises, history has shown its political misuse in many cases. The Supreme Court’s interventions have provided safeguards, ensuring that state autonomy is protected, and President’s Rule is used only as a last resort.
