THIS WEEK
 
ARCHIVES
 
MANIPURONLINE
 
TOOLS
Currency Converter
Stock Calculator
National Stock Exchange
Bombay Stock Exchange
xxx
 

Step 2: In the <body>, place the 

   
10 And Going...
How does one test the standing of a political party in the polity of a country or a State? Should the strength of a party be judged according to the number of representatives it manages to send to the Assembly or should it be judged according to its ideology and its distinct identity nurtured and cultured through the years refusing to compromise on its core values for the sake of power. 

We ask these questions today because it has become extremely relevant in a place like Manipur where politics has increasingly come to mean only power and more power. Again these questions gain credence in the backdrop of the Federal Party of Manipur completing 10 years of existence on October 21. From 1992 to 2002 the journey has been long and eventful for the FPM and during its ride through the rough and tumble of Manipur politics for the last 10 years, the FPM can be said to have undergone through three distinct phases. 

The first phase was when it made its debut in the 6th Assembly managing to send two MLAs in the person of its founding president Professor Gangmumei Kamei from Nungba Assembly constituency and the likeable Dr W Thoiba from Heingang Assembly constituency. To add to the surging fortune of the party, Haokholet Kipgen won the by election from Tadubi Assembly to bolster the strength of the FPM. The FPM appeared to be perfectly satisfied sitting on the Opposition and during this phase the stock of the party went high never mind the fact that it had only three MLAs in the 60 member Assembly. 

Things appeared to look up for the party when the Congress split in the winter of 1997 and the MSCP was born and usurped power from the redoubtable Rishang Keishing. The FPM quickly moved and in dalliance with the MSCP formed the United Front Government under Nipamacha.

The 7th Assembly, which was the beginning of the second phase of the party, began on a bright note with the FPM doubling its score from the previous Assembly by sending 6 MLAs to the Assembly. The FPM became the second most important constituent unit of the United Front regime during the 7th Assembly and this was when the trappings of power began to take its toll on the party and signaled the beginning of the end of the second phase as well as its honeymoon in the United Front Government. 

Firstly, Haokholet Kipgen and L Jayentakumar ditched the party and switched sides to the Samata Party when Radhabinod Koijam who defected from the Congress with 10 of the 11 elected members began to breathe heavily down the neck of the United Front Government. W Thoiba and K Raina also followed suit to round off the story of desertion and betrayal and the party which had six members at the beginning of the 7th Assembly was reduced to just a two men party with Prof Kamei and Dr Ruivah left alone to hold the flag of the party. To complete the tragedy that the FPM had become, Prof Kamei and Dr Ruivah instead of sticking to their earlier stand also joined the Samata led coalition Government. 

The third phase of the party was scripted when the FPM admitted scores of old Congress men who had become MSCP men just prior to the 8th Assembly election. Professor Gangmumei Kamei who fathered and mothered the FPM stepped aside to hand over the post of president of the party to Dr Chandramani and yes the party did creditably well to send 13 MLAs in the 8th Assembly election. 

But this does not answer the question whether the standing of a political party should be judged by the number of representatives it sends to the Assembly or by its distinct identity nurtured and cultured through the years refusing to compromise on its core values for the sake of power. We wonder whether the FPM leadership has the answer to this.

(Courtesy: The Sangai Express)