Is the occupation of Manipur by India stands illegal according to international law?

[Leishangthem]

Central asians are people between the caucuses and the mongols. Nothing more

That's your perspective,and one way of differentiation. There is also this

http://eastasiaorigin.blogspot.com/2017/07/subgroups-of-east-asians.html

 

[Jackdaws]

The so called 62% hindu are all meiteis which actually have their own traditional religion "sanamahi" ,meetei have adopted parts of Vaishavism ,what they follow is very different than your traditional Hinduism.Meeteis maybe hindu or christian but all of them are sanamahi first and foremost.
Meeteis follows hinduism like how japanese follows a version of buddhism along with their traditional religion Shintoism.
Sanamahis is like Shintoism or Taoism rather than Hindusim,it's more spiritual rather than idol worship and it involves ancestor worship,elemental worship . Meiteis worship a dragon diety as their supreme god.Those are not your typical hindu.


Please read again what I posted.I don't believe you have totally construed what you have just read. Manipur was an independent state 3 years before India itself with its own constitution which is still active as wished by the british, and the annexation was orchestrated from India's side ,it was Nehru & co that forced MANIPUR into merger.The merger proposition didn't came from British side. You can't rewrite histoty on your own like that.


There is also a classification of Asians in manner of - East asian= kOREANS,Japanese; Central asians= Chinese,tibeto burman/sino tibetan( NE people belongs to this group) ;Southern= Filipino,indonesian( archipelago related ethnic asian).

Looks like you don't get it at all. ALL 500 plus Princely States in India were sovereign and each was free to have its own Constitution, laws, assemblies etc. But they still recognized British SUZERAINTY over them. That lapsed on August 15th, 1947 so technically ALL Princely states in India and Pak became independent. A treaty of accession did not necessarily amount to a merger. It ensured the rulers of Princely States would keep their titles and be paid a privy purse. @Joe Shearer will explain more to you.

 

[Leishangthem]

Looks like you don't get it at all. ALL 500 plus Princely States in India were sovereign and each was free to have its own Constitution, laws, assemblies etc. But they still recognized British SUZERAINTY over them. That lapsed on August 15th, 1947 so technically ALL Princely states in India and Pak became independent. A treaty of accession did not necessarily amount to a merger. It ensured the rulers of Princely States would keep their titles and be paid a privy purse. @Joe Shearer will explain more to you.

Manipur's case is totally different than your typical mainland indian states;

Manipur State Assembly rejected the Merger Agreement

The 4th sitting of the 3rd session of the Manipur State Assembly in its session held at the Johnston School on 28th September, 1949 at 2.30.p.m rejected the “Merger Agreement signed on 21st September 1949” and declared the Merger Agreement invalid as the powers and authorities of King had been vested with the Manipur State Assembly.

The Merger Agreement was neither approved by his Council of Ministers nor ratified by the Manipur State Legislative Assembly.

The weakness of the Agreement lies also in the fact that the people of Manipur did not give consent in any form to the Merger Agreement as no referendum was held on that issue. Further, the Merger Agreement was neither approved by his Council of Ministers nor ratified by the Manipur State Legislative Assembly. Therefore, the Merger Agreement was illegal.

The Indian Independence Act, 1947, Section 9(5) states that

“ No order shall be made under this section, by the Governor of any Province, after the appointed day, or, by the Governor-General, after the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and forty-eight ( 31 March, 1948), or such earlier date as may be determined, in the case of either Dominion,. by “any law of the Legislature of that Dominion.”.

However, violating the provisions of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, para 9(5), Governor General of India issued an order on 15 October 1949 declaring that ‘the Ministers’ in Manipur State shall cease to function and the Legislature’ of the State shall stand ‘dissolved’ citing Sections 3 and 4 of the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947 (Act XLVII of 1947). This is in violation of Independence Act, 1947 and again illegal.

The Merged States (Laws)- Act, 1949 Act no. 59 of 1949 dated 26th December, 1949 is Illegal

The Merged States (Laws)- Act, 1949 Act no. 59 of 1949 dated 26th December, 1949 is an Act to extend certain laws to certain areas administered as parts of Governors’ Provinces or as Chief Commissioners’ Provinces. The legality of this Act is questionable as it has been passed after actual merger of Manipur to dominion India has already taken place illegally.

Why should a highly responsible democratic Government of India indulged in such deceitful action in order to provide legality to a highly illegal action committed earlier. It is just like hanging somebody first and then issuing the hanging order later on.

As per the Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law, dated the 22 January 1950, paras 1(1) (2), 2(1) the States Merger (Chief Commissioners’ Provinces) Order, 1950 shall come into force only with effect from the 23 January, 1950. Therefore the State of Manipur should have become administered under a Chief Commissioner only from 23 January, 1950 onwards and as such the orders issued by the Ministry of States, New Delhi, dated the 15 October 1949 hurriedly merging Manipur with the Dominion of India was illegal.

Further, the said Manipur Merger Agreement was not done under any Act or Law or Parliamentary Resolution. It was done hastily by the decision of Sri Prakasa, Governor of Assam, V.P. Menon, Advisor to the Government of India violating international laws, the Manipur State Constitution Act-1947 and the Indian Independence Act-1947.

Further, the said Manipur Merger Agreement was not done under any prescribed format under any Act or Rule. It was done on a draft hastily prepared and amended many times by Nari Rustomji, Advisor to the Governor of Assam, V.P. Menon, Advisor to the Government of India. It should be rendered invalid.

 

[Shankranthi]

Manipur's case is totally different than your typical mainland indian states;

Manipur State Assembly rejected the Merger Agreement

The 4th sitting of the 3rd session of the Manipur State Assembly in its session held at the Johnston School on 28th September, 1949 at 2.30.p.m rejected the “Merger Agreement signed on 21st September 1949” and declared the Merger Agreement invalid as the powers and authorities of King had been vested with the Manipur State Assembly.

The Merger Agreement was neither approved by his Council of Ministers nor ratified by the Manipur State Legislative Assembly.

The weakness of the Agreement lies also in the fact that the people of Manipur did not give consent in any form to the Merger Agreement as no referendum was held on that issue. Further, the Merger Agreement was neither approved by his Council of Ministers nor ratified by the Manipur State Legislative Assembly. Therefore, the Merger Agreement was illegal.

The Indian Independence Act, 1947, Section 9(5) states that

“ No order shall be made under this section, by the Governor of any Province, after the appointed day, or, by the Governor-General, after the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and forty-eight ( 31 March, 1948), or such earlier date as may be determined, in the case of either Dominion,. by “any law of the Legislature of that Dominion.”.

However, violating the provisions of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, para 9(5), Governor General of India issued an order on 15 October 1949 declaring that ‘the Ministers’ in Manipur State shall cease to function and the Legislature’ of the State shall stand ‘dissolved’ citing Sections 3 and 4 of the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947 (Act XLVII of 1947). This is in violation of Independence Act, 1947 and again illegal.

The Merged States (Laws)- Act, 1949 Act no. 59 of 1949 dated 26th December, 1949 is Illegal

The Merged States (Laws)- Act, 1949 Act no. 59 of 1949 dated 26th December, 1949 is an Act to extend certain laws to certain areas administered as parts of Governors’ Provinces or as Chief Commissioners’ Provinces. The legality of this Act is questionable as it has been passed after actual merger of Manipur to dominion India has already taken place illegally.

Why should a highly responsible democratic Government of India indulged in such deceitful action in order to provide legality to a highly illegal action committed earlier. It is just like hanging somebody first and then issuing the hanging order later on.

As per the Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law, dated the 22 January 1950, paras 1(1) (2), 2(1) the States Merger (Chief Commissioners’ Provinces) Order, 1950 shall come into force only with effect from the 23 January, 1950. Therefore the State of Manipur should have become administered under a Chief Commissioner only from 23 January, 1950 onwards and as such the orders issued by the Ministry of States, New Delhi, dated the 15 October 1949 hurriedly merging Manipur with the Dominion of India was illegal.

Further, the said Manipur Merger Agreement was not done under any Act or Law or Parliamentary Resolution. It was done hastily by the decision of Sri Prakasa, Governor of Assam, V.P. Menon, Advisor to the Government of India violating international laws, the Manipur State Constitution Act-1947 and the Indian Independence Act-1947.

Further, the said Manipur Merger Agreement was not done under any prescribed format under any Act or Rule. It was done on a draft hastily prepared and amended many times by Nari Rustomji, Advisor to the Governor of Assam, V.P. Menon, Advisor to the Government of India. It should be rendered invalid.

In which case feel free to challenge the merger of Manipur in the Supreme court of India

There is no higher body.

Or do you think pdf is the highest authority in the land ?

 

[Leishangthem]

In which case feel free to challenge the merger of Manipur in the Supreme court of India

There is no higher body.

Or do you think pdf is the highest authority in the land ?

Supreme court of India isn't even necessary to revive Manipur State Constitution Act-1947,the king of manipur is vested the legal authority over it. This is not something anti-Indian or illegal. The International Law allows Manipur to form its own government and declare independence. Manipur need not request the Government of India to grant revival of operation of the Manipur State Constitution Act-1947 and to grant manipur independence. The destiny of Manipur should be decided by the Manipuris themselves.But now manipur is under martial law afspa and the leaders are paid puppet figures.
But there would be vehement oppression from GOI, Manipur needs an ally like china to back heR than she can go for it.

 

[Shankranthi]

Supreme court of India isn't even necessary to revive Manipur State Constitution Act-1947,the king of manipur is vested the legal authority over it. This is not something anti-Indian or illegal. The International Law allows Manipur to form its own government and declare independence. Manipur need not request the Government of India to grant revival of operation of the Manipur State Constitution Act-1947 and to grant manipur independence. The destiny of Manipur should be decided by the Manipuris themselves.But now manipur is under martial law afspa and the leaders are paid puppet figures.
But there would be vehement oppression from GOI, Manipur needs an ally like china to back heR than she can go for it.

Go for it

 

[Leishangthem]

Go for it

Well,the movement may happen sooner than later if immigrants keeps pestering manipur and if GOI tried to flood manipur with immigrants through CAB2016 .Who knows the future.

 

[Joe Shearer]

A storm in a tea-cup. It has been correctly stated that in case of any dispute about the legality or otherwise of the accession of Manipur to the Indian Union, it is the Supreme Court of India that has jurisdiction. Let @Maitham go and raise a petition in that court.

As far as the specious argument about the Maharaja's transfer of powers is concerned, he might have had the authority to transfer some of the powers allowed to him under the suzerainty of the British. He never could have had, legally, the right to transfer his own subordination to the British Crown to a third party, including a third party of his own choice. That was not for him to decide. An analogue would be the action of a debtor of transferring his liability to another party of his choice without the consent or knowledge of his creditor or creditors. It cannot be done. So whatever powers were transferable, the power to choose whether or not to acknowledge British Crown suzerainty was not one of them.

After this suzerainty lapsed, what followed? the Maharaja recovered his sovereignty. Could he then argue, as has been argued, that he had already given up his powers to the Legislative Assembly?

That brings us to @Maitham's claim that Manipur was independent three years before, due to the passage of the Manipur Constitution. What is not clear to him is that such an internal arrangement - a study of the document will make this amply clear - had no impact on the status of Manipur as a subordinate entity to the British Crown (not to British India, a different entity). After this constitution-making exercise, Manipur continued to be a subordinate state, and the suzerain recognised, not the Legislative Assembly, but the Maharaja as the subordinate.

The Standstill Agreement has been called void because it was signed between an entity that did not exist and an entity that was already independent. Only a very shallow understanding of the constitutional situation can lead to this conclusion. The Standstill Agreement was between the British Crown Colony, self-governing, under the Westminster statute to that effect, under the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, and the Maharaja of Manipur; those who recall the questions about the status of the Dominion of India, or, for that matter, the Dominion of Pakistan, prior to these two Dominions forming their own independent constitutions, will recall that the provisions of the Government of India Act 1935 was what formed the constitutional and legal arrangement under which these Dominions functioned from the date of coming into force of the Act until 26th January 1950 in the case of the Dominion of India, another date (in 1956) forming the date of transition for Pakistan. On the date of the signing of the Standstill Agreement (four days before independence), the two signing parties were the Crown Colony of India, that still existed, and had a clearly defined legal and constitutional framework, and the Maharaja of Manipur, not the Manipur Legislative Assembly.

But @Maitham has more doubts, that are actually not doubts but justifications of a quasi-legal nature for a demand for separation.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

That's your perspective,and one way of differentiation. There is also this

http://eastasiaorigin.blogspot.com/2017/07/subgroups-of-east-asians.html

Go learn genetics and geography

 

[Leishangthem]

A storm in a tea-cup. It has been correctly stated that in case of any dispute about the legality or otherwise of the accession of Manipur to the Indian Union, it is the Supreme Court of India that has jurisdiction. Let @Maitham go and raise a petition in that court.

As far as the specious argument about the King's transfer of powers is concerned, he might have had the authority to transfer some of the powers allowed to him under the suzerainty of the British. He never could have had, legally, the right to transfer his own subordination to the British Crown to a third party, including a third party of his own choice. That was not for him to decide. An analogue would be the action of a debtor of transferring his liability to another party of his choice without the consent or knowledge of his creditor or creditors. It cannot be done. So whatever powers were transferable, the power to choose whether or not to acknowledge British Crown suzerainty was not one of them.

After this suzerainty lapsed, what followed? the Maharaja recovered his sovereignty. Could he then argue, as has been argued, that he had already given up his powers to the Legislative Assembly?

That brings us to @Maitham's claim that Manipur was independent three years before, due to the passage of the Manipur Constitution. What is not clear to him is that such an internal arrangement - a study of the document will make this amply clear - had no impact on the status of Manipur as a subordinate entity to the British Crown (not to British India, a different entity). After this constitution-making exercise, Manipur continued to be a subordinate state, and the suzerain recognised, not the Legislative Assembly, but the Maharaja as the subordinate.

The Standstill Agreement has been called void because it was signed between an entity that did not exist and an entity that was already independent. Only a very shallow understanding of the constitutional situation can lead to this conclusion. The Standstill Agreement was between the British Crown Colony, self-governing, under the Westminster statute to that effect, under the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, and the Maharaja of Manipur; those who recall the questions about the status of the Dominion of India, or, for that matter, the Dominion of Pakistan, prior to these two Dominions forming their own independent constitutions, will recall that the provisions of the Government of India Act 1935 was what formed the constitutional and legal arrangement under which these Dominions functioned from the date of coming into force of the Act until 26th January 1950 in the case of the Dominion of India, another date (in 1956) forming the date of transition for Pakistan. On the date of the signing of the Standstill Agreement (four days before independence), the two signing parties were the Crown Colony of India, that still existed, and had a clearly defined legal and constitutional framework, and the Maharaja of Manipur, not the Manipur Legislative Assembly.

But @Maitham has more doubts, that are actually not doubts but justifications of a quasi-legal nature for a demand for separation.

Here's a statement of Mr. G.K. Pillai, retired Union Home Secretary,- “the repeal of the draconian act AFSPA -1958 was one of the first steps towards resolving the vexed conflict of Manipur’s valley and hills”. He said that “ the ancient kingdom of Manipur had a constitution even before India wrote her own and had a proud history and was overnight turned into a C-category state in 1948. He further added“ we have to build trust by dealing with the core issues. An apology, say by the Prime Minister or the Home Minister, for the past mistakes could be a start”.

According to Manipur State Gazette Notification of dated 2 January, 1947, His Highness, the King of Manipur was pleased to enact the Manipur State Constitution Act (MSCA), 1947 on 1 January, 1947, The price of the Gazette was Rs. 1 (one rupee) only per copy to be head of the State Library. “On 12 December 1946, Maharajah Bodhchandra issued a Royal Order constituting a Constitution-Making Committee chaired by F.F. Pearson".
1947, the Maharajah became the Constitutional Ruler when he devolved his powers to the newly established Manipur State Council and Manipur State Legislative Assembly. He was no longer the absolute monarch.

The administration of hill areas, which was earlier carried out by the President of the Manipur State Darbar (PMSD) on behalf of the His Highness was brought under the Maharajah’s control by passing the Manipur Hill People’s (Administration) Regulation -1947. The Maharajah abolished the Darbar and brought in a setup called His Highness in Council similar to the Governor General in Council.. The PMSD was designated as Chief Minister and Darbar members as Ministers. Mr. F.F Pearson IPS the then British PMSD became the first Chief Minister of Manipur on 1 July, 1947. When Mr. Pearson left Manipur on 14 August, 1947, Rajkumar Priyabrata Singh became the Chief Minister of Manipur.
Under Chapter-II, Section (b) of the Manipur State Constitution Act, 1947 the king of Manipur is defined as the Constitutional Head of the State. The Administration and the Executive Authority of the State is delegated to the Council of Ministers. The Council of Ministers shall be responsible for the welfare and good administration of the Hill people of the State. The Council of Ministers shall consists of the Chief Minister and six other Ministers.

Under chapter –III (16) of the Constitution, it is mentioned :- “A Minister of the Council shall not be removable from office except in accordance with the provisions of the Chapter IV”.

Under chapter –IV (17). It is mentioned :-“There shall be constituted a State Assembly…The Assembly shall be ….. Elected for a period of three years … elected by the people on adult franchise as may be laid down under rules for the elections……the Representatives returnable from General, Hill and Mohammedan constituencies in the ratio of 30:18:3 respectively….. with an additional two seats for the representatives of Educational and Business interests”.

The Chapter V (26) of the Manipur State Constitution Act, 1947 says:-,

“ The Law Making Authority in the state shall consists of the Maharajah in Council in collaboration with the State Assembly acting under section 18 above “.

The Manipur State Hill Peoples (Administration) Regulation -1947 was also passed on the same day”.

When Manipur regained sovereign status in the midnight of 14 August, 1947, the Manipur State Constitution Act (MSCA) -1947 was already in operation. As the Governor-General of India or Assam Governor could not revoke any previous order to bring into halt the operation of the laws in force in Manipur. In fact the famous Indian Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel could not find a way to repeal or dissolve or abrogate the MSCA-1947.

Go learn genetics and geography

The user I replied to mentioned "looks" concerned to mongoloids,not genetics of the said, so all that is unnecessary in this case. As far as NE people are concerned they are sino tibetan in gene .Sino tibetan aren't really counted as south east . I myself 0page23 haploid common in mEITEI, it is 35k years old gene from eastern parts of Asia .

Typical NE people looks some what in between North and southern mongoloids. Due to their geographic location .

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Maitham

I have read your post and will address it in sequence of these remarks below. You will appreciate that addressing the events in chronological order will make more sense than jumping around between them.

Further doubts about Manipur's status are centred on the Instrument of Accession, and the withholding clause within that Instrument, such that to @Maitham, and others of that way of thinking, the validity of such an instrument and after that, the scope of such an instrument, are to be assessed by considering the supposed independent status of Manipur.

Regarding the independent status of Manipur and the constitution making effort, the first consideration is that the Maharaja had no power, as a subordinate entity, to hand over a sovereignty that was itself ephemeral to a designated authority such as the Council of Ministers. It is a dictum in law that one cannot gift what is not within one's possession. At the date of the decision to set up a constitution-making body, Manipur was far from being independent; this constitutional move merely sought to change the arbitrary nature of rule within Manipur to another better suited to the democracy and popular participation that was generally felt to be desirable; specifically, within the counsels of the Princes of India, this feeling was encapsulated in the resolution that they moved and passed during the First Round Table Conference to the effect that all states would join the British Crown Colony. As an historical curiousity, the Instrument of Accession, whose text, structure and import has been so roundly criticised by so many eminent constitutional and legal authorities, originated during this time, as a draft to be used by the Princes to join British India.

Our Pakistani friends will join me in wishing this had indeed happened, as the question of a sovereign prince over-ruling the demographic thrust of the Partition agreement would never have come up; what would have taken place would have removed one source of nourishment and sustenance for the Pakistan Army, although no doubt it would have found another.

The questions around the Instrument of Accession are, first, was it legally possible for the Manipur Maharaja to enter into an agreement of the sort of the Instrument of Accession, when he was not in a position to exercise his authority in absolute fashion, having intended to give away some of this authority three years earlier? Second, given the withholding clauses in that Instrument, was GoI in a position to assume complete sovereignty in Manipur?

@Maitham argues that when Manipur regained absolute sovereignty on 14th October 1947, she had already been under constitutional rule of her own for three years, hence sovereignty vested in that constitution's legislative assembly, and was not vested solely in the Maharaja. The Maharaja, to re-use a maxim used earlier, was not at that point of time empowered to exercise absolute authority, therefore what he gave away to GoI was not his to give away at all, but was the right of the legislative assembly.

This is fallacious.

The Maharaja was not absolute sovereign before the 15th October 1947. He was a subordinate ruler of a suzerain power that wielded the final authority.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Indian occupation of Manipur is as legal as Pak's occupation of Balochistan or China's occupation of Tibet and Xinjiang or The US's occupation of Alaska.

 

[Joe Shearer]

If the Maharaja of Manipur became an absolute sovereign for the first time after British rule only on the 15th of August 1947, and if he had given away some of his rights three years earlier to his Council of Ministers and his Legislative Assembly, is it the case that this absolute sovereignty automatically devolved onto his Ministers and the Legislative Assembly?

Not so.

The Maharaja could have given away only what was his to give away on the date of devolving his existing powers as of that day to the Council of Ministers. He could not give away something that might come his way in the future, without an exclusive legislative act or personal proclamation doing so, and without the consent of the superior power, the suzerain. That absolute sovereignty that was implicit in his status remained with him until he gave it away to the GoI through the Instrument of Accession. So that was constitutionally valid.

What about the withholding clause? Admittedly it was part of a document composed a decade-and-a-half earlier, but that does not vitiate it in any way. We need to seek further insight into it.

TO BE CONTINUED:

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Funny you should say that.

When you heard about Northeast States we generally think of those small eyes, flat nose and fair complexion Mongoloid faces.

But these are new visitors who showed up to enrol as Voters in one Assembly Constituency of Manipur.

Manipur was the last bastion of Hinduism in the almost-thoroughly Christianized Northeast. Now being invaded by lakhs of PAN-card & Aadhaar-card holding, burka & skullcap-searing Bangladeshis & Rohingyas - imported by local MLAs for the sake of votes. Soon will be New Bangladesh.

They an now enjoy the "benefits" of opposing the Citizenship bill for Non Muslims. Karma is a bitch.



JAC demand for inclusion of Bengali as native people of Manipur. Just see the man and those sitting behind him. Their demand shows they are from somewhere. Wake up Northeast leaders, else you are doomed.

Manipur is actually a Hindu Majority state. Hindus make just over 50 percent of the population.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

Indian occupation of Manipur is as legal as Pak's occupation of Balochistan or China's occupation of Tibet and Xinjiang or The US's occupation of Alaska.

I told u to spin for me