Commissions of Inquiry in India are often criticised as instruments of delay rather than accountability. Critically examine with reference to the inquiry into the 2023 Manipur violence.

Commissions of Inquiry (CoIs) are appointed under Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, and their findings are only recommendatory [2]. The Union MHA set up a three-member CoI on June 4, 2023 to look into the Manipur violence. It has been extended again and again without a report, which makes it a live test of the "delay over accountability" criticism [1].

Why the criticism holds

• Accountability deferred: the government must table the report with an action-taken memorandum within six months of receiving it [2]. With no report, that clock never starts. The latest extension (Nov 2026) moves the deadline to May 20, 2027, more than 3.5 years after the panel was set up [1].
• Soft deadlines, no reasons: each order says "as soon as possible but not later than" a date, and no extension has given public reasons. This is a transparency gap [1].
• Perceived conflict of interest: the Terms of Reference cover "lapses or dereliction of duty" by authorities. Yet the Union, which has a duty under Article 355 to protect States, both appoints and extends the panel [1].
• Shrinking value: more than 300 people have died and about 60,000 are displaced, and displaced witnesses are hard to trace. Since the inquiry began, Manipur has had President's Rule (Feb 2025) and then a new elected government (Feb 2026). Lessons may now come too late to help the people who made the decisions [1].
• Mandate overtaken: more than 60 people have died in Naga-Kuki clashes since Feb 2026, a fault line the 2023 mandate was not written for [1].

Why some delay is defensible

• Evidence load: the panel has about 11,000 affidavits to examine [1].
• Natural justice: under Section 8B, anyone likely to be harmed by the findings must be heard [2]. Hasty blame could be overturned in court or inflame ethnic tension.
• Change of chair: Justice Ajai Lamba resigned in Feb 2026, and Justice B.S. Chauhan had to take over midway [1].

Way forward

• An interim report on the causes and extent of the violence, which does not require naming individuals.
• Reasoned extensions that state progress (affidavits examined, witnesses heard).
• Settling Union-State ownership of follow-up action, since public order is a State subject (Entry 1, List II).
• A wider mandate, or a separate inquiry, for the Naga-Kuki violence.

The Manipur inquiry shows that the problem lies less in the CoI as an institution than in open-ended timelines and opacity. Statutory time limits, interim reports and reasoned extensions can turn CoIs into tools of truth and reconciliation. That would serve constitutional morality and SDG 16 (accountable institutions), and May 2027 should be the final deadline.