A victim in a Meitei relief camp in Imphal, who lost her family members in the ethnic tensions between Meiteis and Kukis in Manipur that has lasted for 18 months now, told me – “Imagine two kids fighting. Will the father or mother not step in to stop the fight? Now imagine the children killing each other. Will the parents still not step in to prevent the violence? Then why is the Union government not stepping in to stop Manipur state from burning?”
I don’t believe that the Union government needs to parent the people in states. They just need to truly discharge their constitutional duty. However, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is high on the ‘Modi Ka Parivar’ rhetoric. So, the people of Manipur are asking: is Manipur not part of India? Why has the prime minister not visited it yet?
The Context
As our Indigo flight soared above Manipur, the pilot informed us, “Given the climatic conditions, it will take us another 30 minutes before we land.” With this, we got an additional half an hour of air tour above Manipur. With thick clouds, straight out of a fairyland story, I could see the lush green mountains right under us with small villages perched on hilltops. It was then that the geographical significance of the whole dispute between the Meitei and Kuki communities dawned on me.
Manipur’s capital city Imphal is on relatively flat land surrounded by hills on all sides. While the Meitei community, who follow Hinduism as a religion, live predominantly in Imphal Valley, the Kukis, who follow Christianity, live in the hills. The Nagas, another dominant tribal community who follow a mix of Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity, live in the hills too.
Meitei are about 53% of Manipur’s population with the rest as Kukis and Nagas. However, Meiteis are politically more powerful with 40 out of 60 MLAs belonging to the community, while Kuki and Naga communities have 10 MLAs each. The major institutions such as big schools, hospitals, the legislative assembly, the high court etc. are all in Imphal. The Kuki and the Naga have been given the Scheduled Tribe status and the Meitei are also demanding the same.
Manipur is rich in mineral resources and also has an abundance of palm trees (used for palm oil) and bamboo, amongst others. These resources are found in the hills and there is an underlying question of the ownership of these resources. Like all tribal-dominated states, the ownership of land which has resources is a bone of contention with obvious vested corporate interests. At the same time, the ownership of land is determined by the ST status.
Also read: Manipur – Will the Central Government Stand In the Witness-Box Please?
Consider this: Land rights of the tribal communities in Manipur have been considerably diluted through recent successive amendments in the laws governing such rights. For instance, Section 158 of the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960, only permits transfer of tribal land to a member of the Scheduled Tribes. However, more and more areas have been classified outside the purview of this section to enable the transfer of land to non-tribals.
Similarly, amendments have been introduced in the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, with the most recent amendment in 2023 wherein 6 critical atomic minerals – lithium, beryllium, titanium, niobium, tantalum, and zirconium – have been ‘delisted’ in order to encourage greater land encroachment by the private sector without adherence to the regulations imposed upon them in the category of atomic minerals. These amendments also violate the Forest Rights Act of 2006, which grants tribal communities the right to dwell on their land, use its produce, and crucially, access its resources. Their rights are being systematically dismantled with these dilutions.
So, in Manipur, on the one hand, through legal amendments, many land/areas with important resources, are being opened up for non-ST status people to own/control, thereby considerably diluting the principle that underlies the general law of predominant ownership by tribals across the country. On the other hand, those land areas which have been cleared off for private ownership may still face resistance from the tribal population if the corporates do come in a big way – Chhattisgarh being a case in point. The government’s stance on the laws, as well as the displacement of people from their villages, all point to a seemingly orchestrated strategy of transfer of resources into a few powerful hands. In this regard, while the government seems to ‘frame’ the conflict in Manipur between the larger Meitei and Kuki communities, it is actually just about securing the interests of a few, with both communities suffering equally in the process.
FILE IMAGE: A candlelight vigil in Churachandpur, Manipur. Photo: X/@AboriginalKuki
Manipur chief minister N Biren Singh’s statements blaming the increase in poppy production and the influx of people illegally entering from Myanmar – which shares the border with Manipur – as part of the reason for the increasing ethnic tensions belies the point. Firstly, on the issue of drug control and poppy cultivation, there are clear commercial interests. Secondly, the international borders are to be guarded by the Union government.
So again, why is the Union government failing to protect the international borders between Myanmar and Manipur and stop the influx of illegal migrants? The government cannot have its cake and eat it too. Either, it is failing to protect the borders and needs to admit so, or stop blaming the illicit drug scene as the major factor in current disturbances caused in the state.
In addition, the ongoing conflict about the demand of Meiteis for ‘ST’ status will have ramifications on reservations in jobs, schools and government offices, amongst others.
This begs the question that if any community which is in the majority in a state gets ST status and its added benefits, will that not set a precedent for populist measures in other states in India? In that sense, it is also a classic dispute between communities for power and status.
The Current Scenario
The crescendo of the ethnic tensions between Meiteis and the tribes – mainly Kukis and Nagas – was reached on May 3, 2023. The Kukis, Nagas and other tribes which have an ST status in Manipur were taking out a ‘Tribal Solidarity March’ in Churachandpur district to protest the demand of Meiteis for the same following the recommendation of the Manipur high court.
When an armed mob attacked the protestors and the police failed to do anything about it, the conflict blew out of proportion. Next thing, Kuki villages were being attacked by Meiteis, and Meitei living in Kuki areas were being driven out by the Kukis.
Today, several relief camps have been set up in both the Kuki areas and in Meitei areas. But here is the thing – you have to see the reality of Manipur to believe it. There are hard lines drawn about what constitutes the Meitei area and the Kuki area. We can’t find any Kuki in Imphal today and no Meitei in Kuki hills. One can only imagine how the high court or the legislative assembly is operating in such a scenario.
The in-between borders are heavily guarded by the security forces, with volunteer groups of both communities further putting up checkpoints to ensure that the ‘other’ is not found in their area. Ironically, it was only possible to drive from one side to the other with a taxi driven by a Muslim person. That too wasn’t easy.
As one person told me in confidence, “Now, both sides are beginning to mistrust Muslims as secret agents for the other side, trading in relevant information.” So, the only person who agreed to drive us to Jiribam from Imphal did not agree easily and also charged an exorbitant fee. He thought he was putting his life on the line.
Is this where we are headed as a country? Imagine a future, with lines drawn neatly amongst different communities, both in their hearts and on the maps. Gujarat is already setting a terrible precedent with the news coming in of the Hindus and Muslims seemingly having clearly demarcated residential areas in most parts, even in the major cities. Manipur presents a much stark and gory reality of this divisiveness amongst communities, making it the new ‘normal’.
The Court
On March 27, 2023, in WP(C) No. 229 of 2023, the Manipur high court heard a petition and disposed it at the admission stage, directing the Chief Secretary of Manipur to “submit the recommendation in reply to the letter dated 29.5.2013 of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India” and further to “..consider the case of the petitioners for inclusion of the Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list, expeditiously, preferably within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in terms of the averments set out in the writ petition and in the line of the order passed in WP(C) No. 4281 of 2002 dated 26.05.2003 by the Gauhati High Court.”
The high court, in para 3 of the order, states, “The petitioners have filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to submit recommendation in reply to the Letter No.1902005/2012- C&IM dated 29.5.2013 of the Government of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs within a period of two months or within a time frame and to include Meetei/Meitei community in the Schedule Tribe list of Indian Constitution as a “tribe among tribes of Manipur”, maintaining the tribal status of Meetei/Meitei existed before 21.9.1949 i.e. before signing of the Merger Agreement as part of the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement of Manipur into the Indian Union and also direction on the fourth respondent to restore the Scheduled Tribe status of Meetei/Meitei community.”
Further, in para 7, it states, “Despite the letter dated 29.5.2013, the Government of Manipur failed to submit the recommendation to the reason best known to them. In fact, the representation dated 18.4.2022 submitted by the petitioners was forwarded by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India for necessary action. According to the learned counsel, Meitei community is the one of major/principal tribe of Manipur is not recommended by the State Government. Hence, the petitioners have been advised to file the present writ petition.”
In para 15, the high court further observes, “This Court finds some force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, as the petitioners and other Unions are fighting long years for inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the tribe list of Manipur.”
It is to be noted that on February 21, 2024, the Manipur HC in Review Petition No. 12 of 2023 set aside a prayer contained in Para No. 17(iii) of the judgment in W.P.(C) No. 229 of 2023.
Also read: Manipur Tapes: SC to Investigate Audio Clip Allegedly of CM Biren Singh’s Voice
Whether the court should have interfered in the matter at all and made observations seemingly supporting the inclusion of the Meitei in the ST category, without hearing anyone from the political ‘other side’ is a legal question with both ‘technical’ and ‘moral’ underpinnings.
The political nature of the dispute cannot be neglected and while the courts cannot refuse to hear a matter simply because of its political characteristic, the classic adage of ‘justice should also seem to be done’ is the only anchoring principle for the courts to remember.
When a matter is finally heard at the admission stage, after hearing the state and the petitioners, with no room for objections from the intervenors – people from any community who want to have a say in the matter or be heard are effectively taken away.
Further, the larger political climate in India where a lot of disputes seem to be emerging from an analysis of history – ‘but who actually started it?’, ‘but what was underlying this structure first’, or ‘who began the violence first’ – all tend to mislead on the scope that judicial bodies are empowered to exercise in the first place.
Representative image: Manipur Police conducting a search operation. Photo: X/@manipur_police
Can the courts in India, including high courts and the Supreme Court, actually go into dispute fault lines dating so far back that they have no way to measure up the legal evidence one way or the other, conclusively?
These disputes that pit communities against each other on the basis of a much older history presented and insisted upon as ‘fact’ by both sides only end up destroying the peace at present. Yes, justice precedes peace, and justice ought to be done. However, allowing one-sided, half-hearted or speedy decisions without taking all stakeholders into account does both the people and the confidence in the judiciary a disservice.
This is why there is a separation of powers between the ‘political’ (executive) and the ‘judicial’ (judiciary) questions and disrupting this would mean that the courts are now being used to discharge a political process or an issue which should be contested in the political arena instead of the courts.
This leads to a constitutional issue of creating a ‘slippery slope’, where governments, interested petitioners, or over-enthusiastic persons can ask the courts to do what should ideally be the government’s role.
The recent happenings in Sambhal are a case in point. The case of judicial overreach unfortunately seems to be becoming the new norm, albeit this time with tremendous consequences as seen in the aftermath of the Babri-Ayodhya dispute. The courts, once they begin a process not constitutionally warranted and out of sync with the ‘rule of law’, cannot reverse the hands of the clock. They will also never be able to tell where that influence will stop.
Also read: Is Amit Shah Right That ‘No Major Incidents’ Occurred in Manipur in the Last Three Months?
The History
The history of political and ethnic conflict in Manipur can be traced back to the pre-colonial period. As early as the 16th century, multiple wars between Manipur and Burma began the fragmentation of the various communities living within the territory. This dark period saw the annihilation of half the population of Manipur by the Burmese forces. However, the current geopolitical division between the hills and the valley can find its roots in the British invasion of the Indian subcontinent. In the mid-18th century, Raja Jai Singh requested British assistance against the brutal clashes between Manipur and the then Burmese empire. As it was witnessed throughout the country, however, internal disputes within the royal family weakened their reign and allowed the British to gain a stronger hold over the region to favour their trade with China.
Apart from the Anglo-Manipur War of 1891, small forces were formed to rebel against the British throughout the 20th century such as the Kuki Rebellion of 1917, the Zeliangrong Naga Uprising of 1930 or the Nupi Lan – a massive women’s agitation of 1939-40. The inclusion of Manipur within the newly independent Indian territory continued to be fraught with tensions due to which the Armed Forces Special Powers Act of 1958, was enforced. Interestingly, Meiteis and Kukis have not been the only communities in variance with each other. The Kuki-Naga clash of 1992 also led to tremendous loss of life and property, with Nagas claiming their rights as the original settlers of the region. Due to their violent history and the territorial interest of multiple communities, everything from minute policy alterations to larger regime changes have resulted in conflicts born out of cultural and political differences, insurgency, land rights and communal insecurities.
As recent as 2004, the rape of a Manipuri woman, Thangjam Manorama Devi, by members of the Assam Rifles paramilitary had led to widespread protests, including a nude protest by the Meira Paibi women’s association. Tensions had erupted but were soon quelled by the then-Union government.
To be clear, yes, Manipur has a history of long-standing tensions between different communities but the previous governments intervened and stopped them. Why is the current BJP government failing to do the same? Manmohan Singh did visit Manipur after the 2004 tensions, so why is Modi failing to do the same? History answers some questions, but in this case, it also raises some important ones.
Need for Union Government’s Intervention
We visited Manipur for five days, met several people from both communities and also visited relief camps in Imphal, Churachandpur, Kangpokpi and Jiribam which have seen a fresh spate of violence, with three women and three children’s bodies telling a gruesome tale of violence. Who committed these murders – given that no Kuki organisation has taken responsibility for them yet – is a question whose verdict is still out.
Meiteis and Kukis disagree on almost everything at this point. Both sides blame each other for ‘starting it all’. Both sides affirm that the terror that was unleashed in May 2023 was ‘pre-planned’. Both sides appeal to their ‘values’ and state that it is wrong to commit such heinous crimes against women and children. Yet, they try to justify the killings on the other side by invoking the horror stories committed on women and children on their side. At this point in time, both Meiteis and Kukis also sound convinced that they cannot trust the other side and that the other side is a terrorist organisation.
But here’s what they agree on: the Union government has not done enough to control the escalating tensions in Manipur. It does not want to intervene. Otherwise, why has it not imposed the President’s Rule in Manipur? We have seen President’s Rule being imposed at the slightest political upheaval but here in Manipur, it has been 18 months of non-stop violence without the Union government recommending that the President intervene.
Constitutionally speaking, President’s Rule would mean the need for fresh elections in Manipur in six months. Given that the people of Manipur are now so angry that they are burning down and ransacking the house of BJP MLAs, the palpable anger against BJP in Manipur is not hard to feel. The victory of Congress on both seats in Manipur in the Lok Sabha elections this year makes it clear.
So, the Union government is not imposing President’s Rule in Manipur because it knows that it will have to conduct elections in which it is most likely to lose. However, part of it is also because of pandering to different interests and trying to be politically right. While some Kukis are vehemently calling for a separate Kukiland, others want stronger Autonomous District Councils (ADCs). Others have called for Manipur to be made a Union Territory with separate areas for Kukis and Meiteis. In any of these cases, the elephant in the room is why the Union government has not attempted to take the first step – removing weapons from both sides as a logical precursor to any peace dialogue.
Representational photo of Manipuri armed forces. Credit: PTI
Firstly, yes, AFSPA (Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958) has been imposed. However, AFSPA has always been there in the Kuki-dominated hills, and it has further been imposed in the six police stations in Meitei-dominated Imphal, which are close to the hills, and not in the entire valley. Given that both sides are heavily armed, doesn’t it make sense to ensure equal application of AFSPA to remove the weapons on both sides as first priority? Just to be clear, I am not advocating for the imposition of AFSPA, but if it is done, it has to be done equally and without discrimination to neutralise both sides. In any case, one cannot escape the tragic irony of AFSPA in Manipur.
While the world’s longest hunger striker – Irom Sharmila did a hunger strike for more than 500 weeks, from November 2000 to 2016, to remove AFSPA from Manipur, here we are, again grappling with AFSPA and potential human rights violations in Manipur. It is as if the more things change, the more they remain the same.
Secondly, an attempt has to be made to bring warring groups to the negotiating table to arrive at a resolution. The news about weapons being stolen from the police stations is a story hard to believe. The lack of Manipur’s police intervention on May 3, 2023, is also difficult to understand. All of this collectively points out the criminal culpability and the corresponding lack of intent of both the state and Union governments to contain the violence in Manipur.
Manipur – the far north-eastern state – has become BJP’s political laboratory away from the attention of the people of the so-called ‘mainland’ while the national media chooses to remain silent as the people of Meitei and Kuki community adjust to the new ‘normal’.
It is not as if Manipur hasn’t seen unrest before May last year but never before was it allowed to fester on for so long. This itself brings the Union government to the witness box.
If the Union government does not intervene fast, the complex labyrinth of issues in Manipur will fester on and make it an issue that will last for generations. If the government thinks that it can take political advantage or find ‘opportunity in chaos’, it needs to be reminded that history has shown that when you use hatred as a tool for political benefit, it comes to bite you back.
There seems to be a mix of reasons for the Union government’s diabolical attitude towards Manipur. Yes, it is about the ‘ownership of resources for a few’, but it is also about sending a political signal of what they can do with minorities – Christians, in this case – and also the fear that when they use a majority’s sentiment for political benefit, the same people when they see the government’s true intent, won’t come to support them.
Ultimately, a few can keep the larger set of people fighting over their vested interests but truth always prevails. Love always wins. Above all, people want peace. And so, all regimes learn their lessons in due time. The damage done to people’s lives and the social fabric and turning a blind eye to the egregious human rights violation in the interim is unforgivable.
But for a moment, let’s keep the politics aside. Let’s keep the corporate interests aside. The Union government should intervene because it is not okay for women to be paraded naked. It’s not okay for both Meitei and Kuki women to be raped, tortured and abused. It is not enough for the National Commission of Women to pay a cursory visit and do nothing significant. It is not okay for the BJP to say ‘Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao’ while turning a blind eye to the plight of women in Manipur. If we Indians stay silent now, we have no right to speak of women and their place in our society. It is time we pay women more than lip service. It is time we stand up for them. This is not a story of just one woman. Women in the Northeast, specifically in Manipur, have been fighting for too long. If the government stands by women and human rights and has still refused to speak up – it should be pronounced guilty.
A version of this article was first published on The Womb.
Avani Bansal is an advocate in the Supreme Court and a national spokesperson for Congress. Parika Singh is an advocate in the Supreme Court.
