Explained | How do Emergency Provisions Impact Centre-State Relations?

What’s in today’s article?

• Introduction
• India’s Federal Structure
• Understanding Emergency Provisions
• Historical Context and Judicial Interpretation
• Recommendations from Various Commissions
• The Case of Manipur
• Conclusion

Introduction

• The recent surge in violence in Manipur has reignited discussions on the Centre-State relations in India, particularly regarding the use of emergency provisions.
• These provisions allow the central government to intervene in the affairs of state governments under specific circumstances.

India’s Federal Structure

• India operates under a federal system, where governance is shared between the Centre and the States.
• The Constitution, through its Seventh Schedule, divides powers between the two levels of government.
• Law and order are primarily the responsibility of the State governments.
• However, in cases where there is a breakdown of governance, the Centre has the authority to intervene under certain emergency provisions.

Understanding Emergency Provisions

• The emergency provisions are encapsulated in Part XVIII of the Constitution, specifically Articles 355 and 356.
• Article 355 mandates the Centre to protect states from external aggression and internal disturbances, while ensuring that state governments function according to the Constitution.
• Article 356 grants the Centre the power to impose President's Rule in a state if it fails to comply with constitutional norms.
• These provisions are unique to India, as similar federal systems like the U.S. and Australia do not allow the central government to remove state governments.

Historical Context and Judicial Interpretation

• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, while drafting these provisions, expressed hope that they would remain unused.
• However, Article 356 has been misused on numerous occasions to remove state governments, often for political reasons.
• It was only after the landmark 1994 Supreme Court judgment in the S.R. Bommai case that limitations were imposed on the use of Article 356.
  • The court ruled that it could only be invoked in cases of a constitutional breakdown, not merely for a law-and-order issue.
  • Additionally, the court emphasized that the imposition of President's Rule would be subject to judicial review.
• On the other hand, the scope of Article 355 has expanded through various court rulings.
• Initially interpreted narrowly, cases like Naga People's Movement of Human Rights vs Union of India (1998) have broadened its application, allowing the Centre to take a wider range of actions to fulfil its duty of protecting states.

Recommendations from Various Commissions

• Several commissions have examined the use of emergency provisions in Centre-State relations.
• The Sarkaria Commission (1987), the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002), and the Punchhi Commission (2010) all concur that Article 355 places a duty on the Union government, but any actions under Article 356 should be used as a last resort.
• They emphasize that it should only be invoked in extreme situations.

The Case of Manipur

• The violence in Manipur has brought the issue of emergency provisions to the forefront once again.
• The situation in the state, marked by widespread violence, looting of police ammunition, and targeted attacks, goes beyond a simple law-and-order breakdown.
• Yet, despite the severity of the crisis, Article 356 has not been invoked.
• This is likely due to political considerations, as the same party holds power both at the Centre and the State.
• However, Article 355 is being utilized, and the Centre is taking steps to restore normalcy through various instructions and actions.

Conclusion

• While India's federal structure emphasizes state autonomy, emergency provisions like Articles 355 and 356 give the Centre considerable power to intervene when necessary.
• However, these provisions must be used judiciously to maintain the delicate balance between the Centre and the States.
• The situation in Manipur highlights the complexities of this relationship, where political, constitutional, and legal factors all play a role in determining the extent of the Centre’s involvement.

Q1. Which Amendment Act had made the declaration of a National Emergency immune to judicial review?

Ans. The 38th Constitutional Amendment Act made the declaration of a National Emergency immune to judicial review.

Q2. Which state has the first state emergency in India?

Ans. State emergency was used for the first time in the state of Punjab in 1951.

Source: How do emergency provisions impact Centre-State relations?