Manipur Proposed To Remove 'Any Kuki Tribes' From ST List. Tribal Affairs Ministry Says...

The inclusion or exclusion of communities in the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list in Manipur "may be kept on hold" due to the "sensitive nature of the prevailing situation" in the state, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs said in response to queries filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The queries requested the ministry to give an update on the current status of the Manipur government's formal proposal sent to the ministry on February 8, 2023 to have the 'Any Kuki Tribes' category removed from the ST list, which needs parliament's approval.

"Mere forwarding of representations to the state may be construed as acknowledgment of their claims and may spark untoward incidents to disturb peace and tranquility in the region," the Tribal Affairs Ministry said in its final response to queries and subsequent appeals filed under the RTI Act.

In 1956, parliament removed the 'Any Kuki Tribes' category from Manipur's list and cleared the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act.

In 2002, or 46 years later, the then Manipur Congress government's request to the central government to bring back 'Any Kuki Tribes' category in the ST list sailed through parliament, and 'Any Kuki Tribes' re-entered the border state's ST list a year later.

The Manipur government - in a follow-up letter to the Tribal Affairs Ministry on July 25, 2024 on the state's proposal to remove 'Any Kuki Tribes' from the ST list sent on February 8, 2023 - said no community under 'Any Kuki Tribe' or 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' will be removed from the ST list as they are already covered in the rest of the list, where they will remain under the names of their distinct tribes.

The proposal is simply about removing the "redundant nomenclature Any Kuki Tribe", the state government said. It alleged the insertion of 'Any Kuki Tribes' has enabled "illegal immigrants from neighbouring countries" to "enlist themselves" under this category.

Two appeals filed in April and May this year to the ministry's response to RTI queries asked whether constitutional action had been kept on hold by citing law and order even if all the modalities were fulfilled. NDTV has seen the documents.

The Tribal Affairs Ministry said that for inclusion or exclusion of communities in the ST list, the state government concerned has to first give a proposal along with ethnographic details to the ministry.

Thereafter, the proposal has to be concurred with by the Registrar General of India (RGI) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) before being considered for amendment legislation, it said.

Manipur Government's Proposal

In Manipur's case, the state government on February 8, 2023 wrote to the Tribal Affairs Ministry that the state cabinet had over four years ago - on October 19, 2018 - approved the deletion of the nomenclature 'Any Kuki Tribes' from the state's ST list, documents show.

Thereafter, the state cabinet at its meeting on January 2, 2023 decided to contact the Tribal Affairs Ministry to inform about its decision. The following month, on February 8, 2023, the Manipur government sent the first letter to the ministry seeking removal of 'Any Kuki Tribes' from the ST list.

"I am directed to convey that the state cabinet in its sitting held on October 19, 2018 had approved the deletion of the nomenclature 'Any Kuki Tribe' from the list of Scheduled Tribes for Manipur. The state cabinet in its sitting held on January 2, 2023 has reiterated its decision taken on 19.10.2018 and approved to convey the decision to the government of India," the letter said.

The Manipur government also told the ministry that the state cabinet had "approved the correction" of the terms 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' to just Mizo in the ST list.

"... It is requested that necessary action may be taken for deletion of Any Kuki Tribe from the list of Scheduled Tribes for Manipur and also to correct the name of 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' to Mizo as approved by the state cabinet," the state government said in the letter.

Tribal Affairs Ministry's Response

The ministry replied to the Manipur government on March 27, 2023 with several questions on the state's proposal, and told the state government to clarify on them.

The Tribal Affairs Ministry in the letter asked the state to explain in detail "as to how Any Kuki Tribes and Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes ST community people will be treated in future and what would happen to those who already have Any Kuki Tribes and Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes ST certificates if proposed changes are implemented..."

It told the state to send a list of communities covered and getting ST certificates under the 'Any Kuki Tribes' and 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes' categories. Apart from the clarifications on these questions, the ministry told the state government to send a complete proposal along with an ethnographic study report in support of the proposal.

"If any of them are proposed to be removed from the list of communities already notified under the general nomenclature of 'Any Kuki Tribe' or 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe', justification, along with an ethnographic report in support of the proposal may be sent. The names of those communities, which have been hitherto included in the general nomenclature of 'Any Kuki Tribe' and 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe', which are proposed to be retained in the ST list, may also be indicated with justification for their retention in the list," the Tribal Affairs Ministry said in the letter.

Less than two months later, on May 3, 2023, the Meitei-Kuki ethnic clashes began.

State Government Clarifies

Over a year later, on July 25, 2024, the state government responded to the queries sent by the Tribal Affairs Ministry.

On the ministry's question of what would happen to those who are under 'Any Kuki Tribes' if the proposal goes through, the state government said, "...All sub tribes belonging to 'Any Kuki Tribe' have been listed separately and independently in the Amendment Act of 1956 of Scheduled Tribes of Manipur. Persons belonging to 'Any Kuki Tribe' will therefore be recognized under any of the remaining existing list of sub-tribe, to which he/she belongs, and treated as such, in future."

Those belonging to 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' will be recognised as 'Mizo', the state government said. The ST certificates already issued or which will be issued until the proposal is approved will be held legally valid for all purposes, it said.

The Tribal Affairs Ministry had asked the state government to give a list of communities covered and getting ST certificates under 'Any Kuki Tribes' and 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes'.

In its reply, the state government said communities getting ST certificates in the name of 'Any Kuki Tribe' or 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' have been provided such certificates based on their applications that they belong to such a group - without describing their sub-tribe.

"... [The] need for furnishing the list of communities, as sought vide Ministry's letter dated 27.3.2023 therefore may be exempted for the same reason as cited by the then Union Minister of Law in the parliamentary debates of the 1956 amendment," the state government said, referring to the time after Independence when the government populated the ST list with the names of every tribe, instead of an umbrella term that begins with 'Any'.

What Happened In 1956

For Manipur, the parliament in 1956 specified the names of all the sub-tribes belonging to two tribal groups earlier known as 'Any Naga Tribes' and 'Any Kuki Tribes'. This drew a response from the then Outer Manipur MP Rishang Keishing, who wanted to retain the umbrella terms that began with 'Any'.

Keishing, who went on to become Manipur chief minister over two decades later, back then told parliament he was concerned that mentioning the Naga and Kuki sub-tribes only by their distinct names could be "simply considered and treated by the local people as an attempt to disintegrate the entire community."

After taking note of the Outer Manipur MP's statement, the then Union Law Minister Hari Vinayak Pataskar said there was a difference between Assam and Manipur in the matter of description of the Kuki and Naga tribes - in Assam, all sub-tribes of Kuki have been shown under the heading 'Any Kuki Tribes', while in Manipur all the sub-tribes have been shown separately.

"That is the only difference. There is no ground for suspecting that something unfair is being done to them because of the description of these tribes. It is done according to the recommendation of the state government and the Backward Classes Commission and as such, there is no discrimination," Pataskar said.

The Manipur government enclosed the details of the 1956 parliament proceedings as an annexure in its response to the Tribal Affairs Ministry.

"Therefore, no sub-tribe was left out by parliament when the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe Orders (Amendment) Act 1956 was enacted... as each and every sub-tribe of Manipur was meticulously described separately/independently," the state government said.

'Any Kuki Tribes' Re-Added To ST List In 2003

In the letter to the Tribal Affairs Ministry, the Manipur government alleged that the then state government recommended the central government to bring back 'Any Kuki Tribes' in Manipur's ST list "for political reasons".

"After 47 years... the then state government of Manipur had again recommended inserting the name of the broad tribal group namely 'Any Kuki Tribe' in the lists of ST... accordingly 'Any Kuki Tribe' was again restored in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 2002 for political reasons," the Manipur government said in the letter to the Tribal Affairs Ministry.

Manipur had a Congress government at that time.

In the letter, the state government said if at all the broad tribal group 'Any Kuki Tribe' was to be restored, then the tribal group 'Any Naga Tribe' should have been restored too, but that was not done.

"Thus, for political reasons, the tribal group of 'Any Kuki Tribe' was restored..." it said.

The amendment for Manipur made in 2002 in the law that decides ST inclusions and exclusions was enforced from 2003.

Assam And Manipur's Listings

'Any Kuki Tribes' as mentioned in Assam's ST list is different from how it is mentioned in Manipur's list. In Assam, all the sub-tribes are listed under one heading called 'Any Kuki Tribes'. The ST certificate is issued only in the name of any of the sub-tribes and not 'Any Kuki Tribes', which is an umbrella term.

In Manipur, 'Any Kuki Tribes' is mentioned as a separate, distinct tribe like Thadou, and the ST certificate is also issued under 'Any Kuki Tribes'.

The Kaka Kalelkar Commission or the first Backward Classes Commission formed in January 1953 had, in its report given to the government in March 1955, recommended that "all the tribes should be listed by their own particular names in the hilly areas of Assam and Manipur."

Manipur, which was a 'Part C state' at that time, made the changes in the 1956 amendment and listed tribes by their distinct names; Assam's remained unchanged to this day.

'Part C states' were like today's Union Territories.

The government rejected the Kaka Kalelkar Commission in 1961; the second Backward Classes Commission (Mandal Commission) came nearly two decades later.

'Ethnographic Report Not Needed'

The Tribal Affairs Ministry had asked the Manipur government to give an ethnographic report to support the state's proposal.

In its response, the state government said that its proposal is not for adding any new community to the ST list, but "essentially for removing a redundant nomenclature 'Any Kuki Tribes' and 'Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribe' in the interest of national security, and further as it is not for adding any new community, the need for submitting an ethnographic report may also be exempted."

No community is getting excluded from the ST list because those under 'Any Kuki Tribes' will return to their respective tribes, the state government said, and referred to the answer it gave to the question by the Tribal Affairs Ministry on what would happen to people under 'Any Kuki Tribes' if the proposal goes through.

What Manipur State Commission For Scheduled Tribes Said

The state government said it consulted the Manipur State Commission for the Scheduled Tribes before it sent the proposal to the ministry in February 2023. The commission in a letter to the state government on July 25, 2024 said it had "no objection to take the considered decision of the state government for deletion of 'Any Kuki Tribe' from the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur as all the sub-tribes of the Kuki tribe and Naga tribe were already included in the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 1956."

"Therefore, it is unnecessary to continue with 'Any Kuki Tribe' in the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur," the commission said in the letter, which the state government enclosed in its response to the Tribal Affairs Ministry.

State Cabinet Decision

The state cabinet in its sitting on October 19, 2018 for the first time - 15 years after 'Any Kuki Tribes' was re-added to the ST list - approved the deletion of the nomenclature.

"What has now transpired is that with insertion of the group namely 'Any Kuki Tribe', illegal immigrants from neighbouring countries who have entered Manipur have been facilitated to enlist themselves as 'Any Kuki Tribe' and also obtain Indian citizenship. This has helped illegal immigrants from Myanmar and Bangladesh to enter India via Manipur in an organised manner while also curtailing or depriving the rights of genuine recognised Scheduled Tribes of the state of Manipur from accessing various benefits meant for the ST communities," the Manipur government said in its response to the Tribal Affairs Ministry on July 25, 2024.

The state government said that as far back as 1987, the Thadou National Council of the Thadou tribe in Manipur gave a memorandum to the then Union Minister of State for Welfare Rajendra Kumari Bajpai, and raised concerns that "the proposed bill for introduction in parliament for recognition of certain tribes including Kuki or Any Kuki Tribe will shatter the prevailing peaceful condition of the tribes in Manipur."

"The council appealed to the centre not to grant recognition to the nomenclature: Kuki or Any Kuki Tribe," the Manipur government said in the letter to the Tribal Affairs Ministry, and shared a copy of the memorandum as annexure.

Current Status Of Proposal

The appeals to the Tribal Affairs Ministry's responses to the RTI queries asked whether the Manipur government's recommendation to remove 'Any Kuki Tribes' has been sent to the Registrar General of India (RGI), and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) for concurrence - as is required for the process to modify the ST list under rules notified by the government in 1999, amended in 2002 and 2022 - before being considered for amendment in parliament.

Manipur activists M James Thadou and Michael Lamjathang Thadou, who belong to the Thadou tribe, filed the appeals with follow-up questions to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, including request for information on what action has been taken on the Manipur government's proposal.

"The fall out of disclosure of information during the process of examination and during consultation with other stakeholders is that undue pressure and influence is exerted on the authorities by the members of concerned communities. This may lead to interference by vested interests in the independent decision-making process and adversely affect the independent decision-making process as per the constitutional provisions. This is also tantamount to conflict of interest and against the larger public interest," the Tribal Affairs Ministry said in its response to the appeals.

To the specific question whether the proposal has been sent to the RGI and the NCST, the ministry replied, "The Ministry has come across instances wherein disclosure of information regarding notification of a community have led to violence and such disclosure of information will have the potential to disturb public peace, tranquility and encourage enmity between the communities..."

It cited a Supreme Court order that said the RTI Act should not be allowed to become a tool to obstruct national development and integration, or to destroy peace, tranquility and harmony among citizens.

"... No larger public interest is served by disclosing such information, and sharing of such information is exempted under Section 8E of the RTI Act," the Tribal Affairs Ministry said.

So, for now, no information is available on the current status of the proposal - despite the modalities having been followed. It also poses a complex question of law, the activists said, because if the Tribal Affairs Ministry has no objection to the response it received from the state government, can the proposal be held back from being forwarded to the RGI and the NCST for concurrence? Is it an individual matter, or the ministry's decision, the activists asked.

The activists also sought the names and designation of officers who are handling the proposal; the ministry did not give the names as protected under Section 8E of the RTI Act.

James Thadou wrote "harassment by official" in the RTI appeal form under the heading "reason for dissatisfaction/not resolved". Still not satisfied with the ministry's response, James Thadou and his community's civil society organisation, Thadou Inpi Manipur, on August 30 this year wrote a letter to Athira S Babu, the economic adviser to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

"... As per the approved modalities... The government of Manipur has already made such recommendations, including in February, 2023 and July, 2024, thus fulfilling the essential first step. However, the matter has been kept in abeyance citing law-and-order concerns. With due respect, such indefinite delay denies justice to the Thadou community and perpetuates the error created by the wrongful inclusion of 'Any Kuki Tribes' in 2003. This delay is ultra vires, as neither Article 342 of the Constitution nor the approved modalities allow suspension of action on the basis of temporary law-and-order issues," James Thadou said in the letter.

"The presence of 'Any Kuki Tribes' in the ST list has distorted the classification of Scheduled Tribes in violation of the constitutional parameters of primitive traits, geographical isolation, and distinct identity. This improper classification is at the root of the Manipur conflict and violence. Furthermore, the issue of illegal immigration cannot be effectively resolved unless 'Any Kuki Tribe' is deleted, as its very existence encourages wrongful claims and complicates identification of genuine indigenous communities. As long as 'Any Kuki Tribe' remains in the [ST] list, Manipur's law and order will remain disturbed," James Thadou said in the letter.