By Amit Kumar, Twocircles.net
Churachandpur, Manipur: It would not be an exaggeration to say that in Manipur, the dominant political discourse you hear depends on your location. In the valley regions, this discourse is almost completely dominated, and some would say, hegemonised, by the Meiteis. This also explains why the support for passing the three controversial bills has triggered wide-spread protests in the region of Imphal and Thoubal. However, a two-hour ride into the interiors of the state show a drastic change in how the bills introduced by the Manipur government are perceived. Here, the only form of reaction to these Bills is that of complete protest; against passing them. In Churachandpur, you are unlikely to find a person who agrees with the Meiteis; the tribals of this region have been at the centre of protests against these Bills, and understandably so.
File photo of protests in Churachandpur last September after nine people died in police firing.
In fact, the day these Bills were passed, violence erupted in almost all hill districts of Manipur and angry protesters attacked the houses of local MLAs. Over the next two days, 9 people were killed in Churachandpur by security forces including a 10 year old during wide-spread protests. The town is yet to bury its ‘martyrs’ and there bodies remain kept in the district hospital.
The three Bills: The Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Seventh) Amendment Bill 2015 (MLRLR Bill 2015), The Protection of Manipur People Bill, 2015 and The Manipur Shops and Establishments Act (Second) Amendment Bill 2015, are being presented by the Government of Manipur as a ‘solution’ to long pending demand for implementation of Inner Line Permit system by the Meitei organizations to protect them from the high rate of influx of outsiders.
The Inner Line Permit is a special permit required to enter certain restricted areas in the country, and currently such a system exists in Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram. The Joint Committee on Inner Line Permit System (JCILPS) has been spearheading the movement for legislation to “protect the indigenous population from migrants.”
But in Churachanpur, Tamenglong, Senapati, Chandel and Ukhrul–the five hill districts of Manipur–there has been a strong movement against the three bills, spearheaded by Joint Action Committee against Anti-Tribal Bills, also known as JAC.
The JAC is of the opinion that these Bills are another attempt by the Valley people to undermine the status of the tribal regions, which have been ignored when it comes to development. Speaking to Twocircles.net, Mangchinkhup, chief convener of the JAC, said these Bills are the result of over three decades of demands from the valley people. “As early as 1980, the All Manipur Students Union demanded an Inner Line Permit,” he said. The JAC, he added, has never been against Inner Line Permit, and that the ILP issue is being used as a convenient diversionary tactic by the valley people. “Had it been only about Inner Line permit issue, we had no issues. But these Bills are much more than that,” he added.
For tribals, letting go of land is not an option
To begin with, the tribals point out that despite being categorised as Scheduled Tribes, they have been denied the sixth schedule. The Constitution of India refers tribal areas within the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura & Mizoram, as those areas specified in Parts I, II, IIA & III of the table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule. But somehow, the tribal regions of Manipur were never included in the list. “Sixth schedule is our right, which has been denied to us for all these years. But instead of addressing this issue, the Manipur government wants us to forget that we are tribals,” Mangchinkhup adds.
To understand Mangchinkhup’s point, it is important to look Manipur’s demography. While the valley region’s four districts–Imphal East, Imphal West, Thoubal and Bishnupur–occupy 10% of the state’s total area, these four districts, according to Census 2011 data, are home to just over 60% of the state’s population. On the contrary, the five hill districts, which cover about 90% of the state’s area, have only 40% of the population. Over the years, with the rise in construction activities, land has become a premium product in the valley region. Add to that, the increase in the ‘Meyang’ (outsiders) population, and the result has been a growing pressure from the Meiteis and their leadership to both ‘protect’ the Valley and ‘open’ the hill regions to the valley people. And according to the JAC, it is this policy that is at the centre of these Bills; not the ILP.
“The lack of land in the valley is a result of government policies. Over the past decades, all development projects like small-scale industries, colleges, universities and hospitals have been built in the valley region. Bar one hospital, we are yet to see any development from the state. It is the Church that has established schools, colleges and hospitals in this region,” Mangchinkhup adds.
One of the bills set the definition for Manipur domicile: “Persons of Manipur whose names are in the National Register of Citizens, 1951, Census Report 1951 and Village Directory of 1951 and their descendants who have contributed to the collective social, cultural and economic life of Manipur.”
This clause is the bone of contention. “We all know what the level of literacy in the tribal hills was in 1951. Who kept registers at the time? We are told that officers prepared reports sitting in Imphal. Also, it is not clear what they mean by ‘to have contributed to the social and cultural life of Manipur?’ This will leave out many of us tribals,” says an agitated Mangchinkhup. He points to another law which loosens the regime restricting the Meiteis from buying lands in the hills. “The valley people are trying to equate themselves with us and are trying to seek the scheduled caste status,” he says. Even the district’s name comes from the name of a Meitei king from the 19th century. For the locals, the place is still known as Lamka.
“It is about our identity, our territory. All we have is our land. If this is also taken away from us, what do we have left?,” asks Benjamin Vualnam, an alumnus of TISS, Mumbai who came back home after his Master’s in 2013. An important reason behind the deep mistrust among the hill and valley residents is also because of the cultural differences. While all the valley districts have more than 60% Hindu population, in districts like Churachandpur, Christians constitute over 90% of the population. Also, the Zomi and Chin tribes of the region are culturally much closer to the Mizos compared with the Meiteis. “We understand and identify with Mizos a lot more than the Meiteis,” says Vualnam.
The tribal regions invoked a ten-day economic blockade to press for their demands, even as their agitation in Delhi was brutally beaten up outside Manipur Bhawan earlier this month. The tribal delegation had been protesting against the arrival of a delegation from various political parties of Manipur seeking the President of India’s nod for the Bills. Although the President rejected one of the three Bills, the tribals know that the state government is unlikely to give up on their demands. The same can be said for the tribals.