PUCL is now ready for public discussion on IPT Report to evolve reconciliation
By Rabindra Nath Sinha
KOLKATA: Responding to the points raised and concerns expressed over the findings of the Independent People’s Tribunal (IPT) on the Ongoing Ethnic Conflict in Manipur” by Inner Manipur constituency’s Congress Lok Sabha member Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has clarified that the report is intended to offer a platform to the affected communities’ people to share their experience about how they suffered during the prolonged strife and violence. PUCL, which constituted IPT, has stressed that its key objective has been to bridge the divisions between the communities to bring about peace and reconciliation in the violence-scarred north-eastern state.
In the report, IPT, led by ex-Supreme Court judge Kurian Joseph, has sought to drive home the point that for any honest peace restoration, effort must start with fixation of accountability for what happened and which left thousands of people insecure, uprooted and displaced. Indignity has been heaped on them even “during exile in relief camps” over the past two years. IPT had as members eminent persons from different walks of life who, led by Joseph, visited the worst-affected districts, assessed the depositions and testimonies of victims and survivors and interacted with other local groups before writing the report.
PUCL and IPT are open to public discussion on the report and determine the best way to “promote personal and collective healing and finally to move from a sense of revenge to reconciliation”. PUCL has issued its written response to Akoijam’s concerns under the signatures of its president Kavita Srivastava and general secretary V Suresh. Akoijam’s letter is dated August 27; his note was released on August 26.
He has quoted from the report: “From the Meitei side there is also despair …. There is widespread anger at Union home minister Amit Shah for what is seen as betrayal. Promises were not kept True dialogue must …. include all SoO [Suspension of Operations] groups if it is to have legitimacy on the Kuki side.
And then Congress member of Inner Manipur Lok Sabha seat poses / observes: Betrayal and promise? What promise? Is not it an insinuation that the Meiteis who are majority and primarily Hindu and, therefore, presumably a part of the right-wing Hindutva forces …. ? Meiteis did not enter into any understanding with BJP / Amit Shah …. What role have these groups played in the current …. Crisis that led PUCL investigators to recognize them as stateholders for the purpose of peace talks? If there is any understanding, it is between BJP/ Amit Shah and Kuki armed groups under SoO. Is it that the understanding envisaged BJP funding SoO groups and they, in turn, helping BJP to win the election and thereafter BJP meeting their demand (separate administration)?
In response, PUCL has observed: ….. Even after the promulgation of President’s rule on February 13, materially the conditions on the ground has not changed drastically specially for the 60,000 displaced persons which include both Meiteis and Kukis. As for despair, there is a sense that nothing is changing; youths are being arrested while leaders are roaming freely. Rehabilitation packages are inadequate – Rs 75,000 for a home is a cruel joke in a community that lives in shared housing. There is widespread anger at Union home minister as promises he made have not been kept. Women have been excluded from peace talks. Inclusion of SoO groups has been suggested as they play a role in influencing peace processes on the Kuki side. Therefore, without onboarding even hostile parties, it will be difficult to change the status quo.
The PUCL response does not touch the issues of understanding and BJP’s funding of SoO groups. [It is not clear which election is being referred to — for Lok Sabha held on April 19 and 26, 2024 for two seats – Inner and Outer or for Manipur Assembly held between February 28 and March 5, 2022].
IPT’s recommendations suggest rebuilding trust, democracy and co-existence in the state, accountability and justice deserve the highest priority. The judiciary, Parliament and civil society must reclaim this duty and see that it does not become a template for future impunity. To ensure that justice is accessible to all, a permanent bench of the Manipur High Court needs to be established for the Hills. A special investigating team (SIT) should be set up by the Supreme Court (SC), with senior officers from states other than Manipur to probe the role of the armed forces and other security agencies. This SIT should report to SC Court every month. A thorough inquiry of hate speeches has to be conducted and the perpetrators – be they political figures or state functionaries – prosecuted.
Healthcare facilities, including that for mental health and psychosocial support, needs to be toned up urgently at the relief camps. A significant observation of the jury is that “there is great disparity between the quality of life [the] Kukis have, compared to the [the] Meiteis in their respective relief camps. Also, dedicated financial packages are a must for the state’s agrarian economy. The conflict has reduced its fiscal capacity. This is New Delhi’s responsibility.
The jury members heard unconfirmed reports about the conflict being orchestrated by vested interests who would want to destabilise the region so that “the state-corporate nexus takes control of the Hills and the forests to harness ….. the natural resources …” Such clandestine geopolitical interventions [being planned in Manipur and beyond] will have serious implications for the region. (IPA Service)
