GUWAHATI: N Biren Singh’s resignation as Manipur’s chief minister on Sunday after almost two years of parrying calls for his ouster came with the obvious question: Why now?
The buzz is that the BJP brass in Delhi forced his hand, concerned over the widening rift among party legislators in the state over his handling of the ethnic conflict and the possibility of the opposition Congress going ahead with a damaging no-confidence motion against the BJP government despite not having the numbers to do so. Governor AK Bhalla declared his notification summoning the budget session from Monday “null and void” after Biren’s resignation.
BJP and its allies account for 45 MLAs in the House of 60, which, on paper, means the no-trust motion would have met a quick end. However, of the 37 BJP MLAs, seven are Kukis who might have abstained from voting. Also, among the remaining 30, Biren no longer enjoys unconditional support.
The BJP brass would not have wanted to risk the slightest chance of embarrassment in the event of voting on the first opposition motion since this government assumed office. The fissures within BJP Legislature Party widened last Nov when 19 MLAs, including the seven Kuki legislators, skipped a meeting called by Biren to discuss law and order in the state in the wake of violence in Jiribam. The same month, BJP’s strongest ally in the state – Meghalaya chief minister Conrad Sangma’s NPP – withdrew support to the govt for Biren “completely failing to resolve the crisis and restore normalcy”. Sangma said his party would review the decision if there was a leadership change.
A leaked audio clip in which Biren purportedly makes offensive remarks against a community also went against him. The video went viral in August last year.
On February 3, the Supreme Court sought a report from Central Forensic Science Laboratory on the tape that suggests Biren’s role in fomenting ethnic violence.
The Manipur government came out with statements twice – on August 8 and 20 last year – stating the clip was “doctored” and that its circulation on social media was “a malicious attempt by certain sections to incite communal violence or derail the process of peace that has been initiated at multiple levels”.
