Centre to extend President's rule in Manipur for six more months, Amit Shah to move resolution in Rajya Sabha
The extension will take effect from August 13.
"That this House approves the continuance in force of the Proclamation dated the 13th February, 2025, in respect of Manipur, issued under Article 356 of the Constitution by the President, for a further period of six months with effect from 13th August, 2025," a Rajya Sabha Parliamentary bulletin said on Thursday.
Manipur was placed under President's Rule after the BJP failed to reach a consensus on a successor to N. Biren Singh, who had resigned as Chief Minister on February 9.
He stepped down just a day before his government was due to face a no-confidence motion and a critical floor test.
The resignation followed nearly two years of ethnic violence in the state, beginning in May 2023, and came amid increasing pressure from the opposition, which had been demanding Singh's removal.
In April, 21 ruling NDA MLAs from the state wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Shah, demanding the immediate installation of a 'popular government.'
In their letters, they said the people of Manipur had welcomed President's Rule with high expectations, but there had been no visible actions to restore peace and normalcy.
'There is a strong apprehension among the common people that the violence may reoccur. Many civil society organisations have come out openly against the imposition of President's Rule. They have been demanding the installation of a popular government in the state,' the MLAs wrote jointly.
The ethnic violence has left over 250 people dead and displaced 60,000 others. A majority of them are still taking shelter in relief camps.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
12 minutes ago
- Hans India
K'taka: Urea, fertiliser prices rise after surge in demand, farming community in distress
The shortage of urea and other fertilisers in Karnataka has led traders to sell it at double the price, pushing the farming community in the state into distress. Farmers, who were hopeful of a good harvest following favourable rainfall and the early onset of the monsoon this year, are now distraught and staging protests. The situation has further escalated tensions between the Congress-led Karnataka government and the Centre. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has written to Union Minister for Health and Family Welfare and Chemicals & Fertilisers, J.P. Nadda, urging him to expedite the supply of 1.65 lakh metric tonnes of urea fertiliser as per the state's allocation, in the interest of the farmers. Union Minister for Food, Public Distribution, and Consumer Affairs, Pralhad Joshi, strongly criticised Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, accusing him of misleading the people of Karnataka with false statements regarding fertiliser supply. The Department of Fertilisers (DoF) also issued a clarification, stating that it has ensured the timely and adequate availability of 8.73 lakh metric tonnes of urea to Karnataka against a pro-rata requirement of 6.30 lakh metric tonnes during the ongoing Kharif 2025 season. The state has recorded sales of 7.08 lakh metric tonnes during the same period - well above the pro-rata requirement. The DoF stated that it continues to closely monitor the situation and is coordinating with the state government to ensure Karnataka's farmers have timely access to urea throughout the Kharif season, the DoF stated. Despite this, thousands of farmers are lining up outside shops to procure urea fertiliser for sowing. Urea is a crucial agricultural input as it is the primary source of nitrogen, an essential nutrient for plant growth. It significantly boosts crop yields and improves produce quality by enhancing foliage, chlorophyll synthesis, and overall productivity. Urea is typically applied during sowing and as a top dressing during the crop's vegetative growth phase. Since sowing has already begun following good rainfall, farmers urgently need to apply urea to their fields. Without it, crops may suffer from stunted growth, yellowing of leaves, and significantly reduced yields. Long queues of farmers have been observed at fertiliser shops in hobli, taluk, and district headquarters across Karnataka, especially in the northern part of the state. Due to the shortage, shop owners are rationing the supply, limiting sales to just two 50-kilogram bags per farmer. While urea and other essential fertilisers are also sold at fair price shops, many of these outlets have already run out of stock. There are widespread allegations that private traders are exploiting the crisis by hoarding urea and selling it at inflated prices. Farmers have alleged that even as shopkeepers display 'no stock' boards, they are willing to supply unlimited quantities of urea if buyers are ready to pay Rs 500 per bag, while the actual price ranges between Rs 250 and Rs 300. In the Koppal district, farmers blocked roads in protest against the shortage, while in the Haveri district, they confronted officials over the two-bag limit. In some locations, angry farmers have prevented trucks from offloading urea into shops, demanding direct sales from the vehicles. There are also allegations that traders are hoarding fertiliser stocks to create artificial scarcity and drive up prices. Small and marginal farmers have been the worst affected. They cannot afford the exorbitant rates demanded by black marketeers, but at the same time, they cannot risk losing their crops. The current crisis has also revived memories of a tragic incident in 2008, when a 33-year-old man was killed in police firing during a protest over fertiliser shortages in Haveri district. The firing, meant to disperse the agitated mob, occurred shortly after former Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa took office. The incident shook the state government, especially as Yediyurappa had taken his oath in the name of farmers after leading the BJP to power for the first time in South India. Yediyurappa had then blamed the UPA government at the Centre for the fertiliser shortage.
Mint
42 minutes ago
- Mint
Did Narendra Modi beat Donald Trump? PM tops global popularity charts with 75% approval; US Prez sits at…
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has topped the global charts as the most popular democratic leader, earning a 75% approval rating, according to the latest data from US-based business intelligence firm Morning Consult. The survey shows that 75% of respondents view PM Modi favorably, while 7% remained undecided and 18% disapproved. Modi is followed in popularity by South Korean President Lee Jae Myung and Argentine Javier Milei. In contrast, US President Donald Trump ranks eighth, with just 44% approval. Analysts suggest that certain policy decisions, such as trade tariffs and controversial domestic actions, may have contributed to the dip in his popularity. In a post on X, BJP IT department head Amit Malviya said, 'Loved by over a billion Indians and respected by millions across the globe, PM Narendra Modi tops the Morning Consult Global Leader Approval Tracker once again — the highest-rated and most trusted leader worldwide. Strong leadership. Global respect. Bharat is in safe hands. 🙌' However, Opposition parties have criticised PM Modi for consistently avoiding press conferences, claiming it weakens the foundations of India's democracy. India, which ranked 140th out of 180 countries on the Global Press Freedom Index in 2014, has seen its position decline to 159th in 2024, a drop of 19 places. In an interview with AajTak in May 2024, Modi addressed the criticism, saying he refrains from holding press conferences or giving frequent interviews because 'today's media is not the same.' He added that he focuses on doing his work and leaves it up to the media to decide whether or not to cover it. Earlier on Friday, PM Modi became the second-longest-serving Prime Minister of India in consecutive terms -- surpassing the record previously held by former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Narendra Modi, 74, took oath as Prime Minister for the first time on May 26, 2014 and has served a total of 11 years and 60 days in office till date. The erstwhile Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had served for 11 years and 59 days in office in consecutive terms. She held the highest office as Prime Minister of India from January 24, 1966, to March 24, 1977. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, holds the record for the longest-serving Prime Minister in consecutive terms, spanning 16 years and 286 days, from August 15, 1947, to May 27, 1964. The first Prime Minister born after India's independence, Prime Minister Modi, has previously served as the Prime Minister of India from 2014 to 2019 and from 2019 to 2024.
New Indian Express
42 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Minorities won't believe Vijay — he was silent during CAA, 370, triple talaq: Salma
Q: There's often a distinction made between mainstream literature and Dravidian literature. Some even dismiss Dravidian literature as not being 'real literature' — reducing it to something merely used for political campaigning. How do you respond to such opinions, and how do you view the literary value of Dravidian literature? We can't define literature in rigid terms and say, 'this alone is literature'. In earlier times, only Sanskrit literature was seen as 'true literature.' But it wasn't something a common person could understand — it spoke to and for only a certain elite section of society. What about the rest? Their experiences were excluded. This gap was bridged by leaders like Kalaignar Karunanidhi and Perarignar Anna. Their works were powerful because they could be understood by the common man. And to me, that is the true purpose of literature — it must reach people, it must speak to them. Kalaignar's writing spanned across poetry, short stories, novels, even screenplays for films. And he had a strong, devoted readership who admired and connected with his work deeply. Today, literature is more inclusive than ever. Writers like Ramanichandran and Jayakanthan have their own dedicated readers. Each writer has a unique voice, a distinct way of telling stories. And each one has an audience that values that expression. That is the beauty of literature. The real problem is when we try to define literature by ranking it — saying, 'this is the best,' or worse, 'this doesn't even qualify as literature'. Who decides that? Every writer brings something different to the table, and that diversity is what makes literature meaningful and alive. Q: As a Member of the Rajya Sabha, what is your primary goal or focus? What do you hope to achieve through your role in Parliament? I come from a party that has always stood firmly for the ideals of social justice. At the heart of our ideology is the belief that everyone in this society should be treated equally, regardless of their caste, religion, gender, or background. To my knowledge, I am the only woman from the Muslim community in the entire country who is going to take charge as a Member of the Rajya Sabha. This, in itself, speaks volumes about the vision and progressive mindset of our party president and Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, M. K. Stalin. I am deeply grateful to him for giving me this opportunity. As an MP, I will faithfully represent the voice and principles of my party in Parliament. It's a responsibility I carry with pride and commitment. Q: Kamala Surayya was known for her bold and explicit writing — even at a time when such topics were taboo. Today, we see many writers exploring similar themes, but often under the label of 'queer literature' or through anonymous platforms. Do you think it's anonymity that gives writers the courage to write openly about these subjects? I've been considering writing a novel that deals with certain sensitive topics. And while thinking about it, the idea of using a different name and going anonymous crossed my mind. There's a certain courage that anonymity offers. When you write under your real name, people who know you tend to judge or misunderstand you based on the content, regardless of the intention behind it. A few years before the death of Kamala Surayya, I had the opportunity to visit her in Kerala, thanks to a friend. She was under police protection in her own home. During our conversation, she said something that stayed with me: 'Writers write to sense freedom, but my writing has curbed my freedom.' She also said she felt lonely — that she couldn't see or find people like her anymore. That sense of isolation weighed on her deeply. We've all witnessed how writers around the world have been arrested for their writing. So, this fear isn't abstract; it's real and close. Q: When it comes to literature, we rarely see Tamil writers coming together as a collective or voicing concerns as a united front unlike in Karnataka and Kerala. Why do you think such solidarity is missing in Tamil Nadu? Also, when it comes to literary recognition, Tamil writers don't seem to receive the higher-ranking national awards as often as writers from Kerala. What could be the reason behind this disparity? There is politics in groups here that stretches beyond political parties. When Kaaval Kottam by Su. Venkatesan got the Sahitya Akademi Award, one group wrote against it. If there is a voice against my literature, especially from conservatives, shouldn't there be collective opposition from writers? They don't need to support me — they could defend literature. Jealousy runs high in Tamil. No one uplifts the other. In Malayalam, at least when I look from the outside, though there is some talking behind the back, it looks positive. Here, there is no such unity. Q: Does it have to do with not getting much recognition? Even for my novels, sometimes I feel bad knowing that the original in Tamil would not receive an award. But they gave the award for the Marathi translation, which can only do half the justice to the original. There is no logic in this. But I don't know how to lobby. Q: You have contributed to the literature through short stories, novels, and poems. What do you think is the essence of your contribution? I can only say that the essence of all my literature is humanity. I see literature as the basis of loving fellow humans. We read so much literature and stories. The pain from reading the sadness or love of others is only possible through literature. Q: In Tamil Nadu, there were only two political sides — DMK and AIADMK. Now Vijay has started a political party. Generally, minorities vote for the DMK alliance. Now there is talk that Vijay will lure minorities, especially youngsters. His speeches also mainly target minority votes. Is there any chance he gets the votes? Minorities always vote for the DMK. The pattern has changed only once, that I know of. Because no one can forget the 3.5% reservation (for Muslims and Christians) introduced by Kalaignar. This helped them to get employment and education. He is standing alone to target minority votes; he knows it won't happen if he is with the AIADMK-BJP alliance. We don't know who is behind him contesting alone. But minorities won't believe him. You should have done something before, and they must believe you will do something for them again. The CAA protests turned the country upside down. If he has true concern for the minorities, he could have spoken in favour of them. Even recently, there were several atrocities against Muslims in North India. But he has not spoken against anything. He has not spoken when Triple Talaq or abrogation of Article 370 became issues. Suddenly, if he says he will save Muslims, it is not believable. The BJP is responsible for all these atrocities. At least he should criticise the BJP, but that is also not happening. He is only targeting the DMK. So, minorities won't believe him. I think only 5,000 people came for the protest in Chennai (against custodial violence). Minorities will think about who has done things for them. They won't support an actor. In many movies, he has also depicted Muslims badly, showing Muslims as terrorists. These will blow up during the elections. (On the other hand), MGR (late AIADMK founder and CM M.G. Ramachandran) was part of the DMK; he went to the field with cadres. (Late CM) J. Jayalalithaa took over AIADMK — she didn't start a separate party and come on her own to capture power. As far as Vijay is concerned, if we take field-level politics, he is not out there yet. You can't identify a leader without him coming to the field. I agree that Vijayakant (late DMDK founder) is one actor who people voted for. But that has ended.
