Why The Editors’ Guild Of India Report On Manipur Comes Across As Biased And Politically Motivated

The Editors’ Guild Of India (EGI) has published a highly contentious report on the ethnic strife in Manipur where it roundly blames Meiteis for the violence and portrays Kukis as the victims. 

The EGI had deputed a three-member team to investigate the role of media houses based in the Meitei-majority Imphal Valley in reporting on the ethnic strife in the state. The EGI claimed it had received “several representations” accusing the media of “playing a partisan role”. 

The report of the ‘fact-finding mission’, however, comes across as biased against the Meiteis, is seemingly full of inaccuracies, and appears to be based mostly on hearsay. 

It endorses the allegations made by the Kukis against Meiteis, and makes no attempt to strike a balance. 

But most importantly, the ‘fact-finding mission’ goes way beyond its brief and delves into the causes of the ethnic violence in Manipur. 

The ‘report’, thus, comes across as politically motivated insofar as it accuses the state government, especially Chief Minister N Biren Singh, of partisanship and fanning ethnic tensions. 

It also criticises the Union government for not dismissing the democratically-elected state government and mirrors the allegations made by the Congress and other anti-BJP parties. 

Chief Minister Biren Singh has condemned the report and charged the EGI with “trying to instigate more clashes”. 

Two FIRs under various sections of the IPC, primarily relating to defamation, promoting enmity between different groups, criminal conspiracy and instigating people against the state have been filed against EGI president Seema Mustafa and the three members of the ‘fact-finding mission’: Bharat Bhushan, Seema Guha and Sanjay Kapoor. 

The All Manipur Working Journalists’ Union (AMWJU) and the Editors’ Guild Manipur (EGM) have slammed the report and threatened legal action against the EGI.

The AMWJU and the EGM have issued a detailed rebuttal of the EGI report and termed it as an exercise to generate sympathy for the Kukis while demonising the Meiteis as well as the Union and state governments. 

Why The EGI Report Is Problematic

• Exceeding Its Brief 

The EGI team’s brief was to examine the reportage of violence by the media and find out if it was indeed biased and divisive as alleged by some. 

The report admits it was not the mandate of the ‘fact-finding mission’ to “examine the causes of ethnic clashes in Manipur”, but goes on to do exactly that in a highly partisan manner. 

• Denying The Reality Of Large-Scale Immigration From Myanmar

The EGI dismisses in an outright manner the stark reality of large-scale illegal immigration of Chin-Kuki people from Myanmar over the last few decades. 

There are, however, numerous reports and a large body of evidence to prove that people belonging to the Chin-Kuki ethnic group have been infiltrating into Manipur in large numbers and this illegal immigration has peaked over the last couple of years since the February 2021 military coup in Myanmar. 

Just one proof of this immigration will suffice: Over just two days — 22 July and 23 July — 718 illegal immigrants from Myanmar entered Manipur’s Chandel district through the porous border. The Assam Rifles, which guards the India-Myanmar border, corroborated this. 

• Blaming The State Government, Especially CM Biren Singh

The EGI levels the charge, without offering any evidence, that the state government “seems to have facilitated Meiteis’ anger against Kukis “through several seemingly partisan statements and policy measures”. 

“The leadership of the state labelled the entire Kuki-Zo tribals as ‘illegal immigrants’ and ‘foreigners’ without any reliable data or evidence”, the report stated, adding that the “Meitei leadership of the government used the fear of outsiders to consolidate its position”. 

These allegations, more in the nature of general statements, are a carbon copy of the charges levelled against the state government by the Kukis as well as the Congress and some other political parties. 

• Levelling False Accusations On Eviction Drives

The EGI report alleged that the Biren Singh government unilaterally declared areas in the hills as ‘protected forests’, ‘reserved forests’ and ‘wetland reserves’ “without following proper procedures laid down in the Hill Areas Committee Act of 1972”.

It says that the state government started evicting people who had encroached on these forests and wetlands in December 2022 and that the eviction was directed against the Kuki-Zo community since they were carried out “only in non-Naga inhabited tribal areas”. 

This eviction drive, the EGI report said, led to violent confrontations between the state authorities and the Kuki-Zo community. 

But the fact is that no act titled the ‘Hill Areas Committee Act, 1972’ exists on paper.

Had the EGI team carried out a detailed investigation, it would have realised that no area of the state was declared a protected or reserved forest or wetland reserve in recent years — the last such declaration happened in 1990.

Also, as the AMWJU and EGM have pointed out, records of evictions available with the state forest department show that from October 2015 to April 2023, a majority of ‘houses’ (families) evicted from reserved and protected forests were Meiteis.

As compared to 143 Meitei families and 137 Pangal (Meitei Muslim) families evicted for encroaching on reserved and protected forests, only 59 Kuki families were evicted during this period.

Also, 38 Naga families and 36 Nepali (Gorkha) families were also evicted during anti-encroachment drives.

• Distorted Charges On Revocation Of SOO With Kuki Militants

The report accuses the Biren Singh government of withdrawing from the tripartite Suspension of Operations (SOO) hastily in March this year and then lifting the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (or AFSPA) from the (Meitei-dominated) Imphal Valley. 

The EGI team interpreted this as a “partisan move in preparation for violence against Kukis which came a few weeks later”. 

The fact is that though CM Biren Singh did announce the state government’s withdrawal from the tripartite SOO agreement, the matter was never pursued and the SOO is still in force.

• EGI’s Portrayal Of Manipur’s War On Drugs As Anti-Kuki

The EGI report says that the Kuki-Zo community was “painted as villains” since they cultivated poppy. This portrayal, said the EGI report, caused grave resentment amongst Kukis and fuelled Meitei anger against Kukis.

The EGI team acknowledged that Manipur had become a part of the new ‘Golden Triangle’ (on drug manufacture and trafficking), but goes on to say, inexplicably, the the “Biren Singh government’s focus has targeted poppy cultivation to the detriment of other components of the drug trade”!

It is as if the EGI is pleading for leniency on behalf of illegal poppy cultivators and even justifying illegal poppy cultivation.

The EGI report even condones illegal poppy cultivation by “poor farmers” and says that the farmers belong to the Kuki-Zo, Naga and Meitei communities.

Fact is, the intensive drive against illegal poppy cultivation was non-discriminatory in nature. What the EGI team turned a blind eye to, perhaps deliberately, is that illegal poppy cultivation is concentrated only in the hill areas of some districts that are dominated by the Kukis. People of other communities do not live there, and so all the cultivators belong to the Kuki-Zo community.

• Absolving Kukis Of The Charge That They Started The Violence

The EGI report completely ignores the fact that the ethnic violence in the state was triggered by attacks on Meiteis living in Kuki-dominated Churachandpur on 3 May. 

It is an established fact that the Meiteis in Churachandpur were attacked without any reason — their properties were looted and torched and they had to be rescued and evacuated by security forces — during a rally organised by the Kukis on 3 May. No one, not even the Kukis, disputes this fact. 

But the EGI report says that the 3 May rally by Kukis in Churachandpur was “peaceful” in complete contravention of facts. 

The EGI team also seems to suggest that the Meiteis erred by demanding Scheduled Tribe (ST) status. The report seems to sympathise with the Kukis who opposed the demand for ST status by the “majority Vaishnavite Hindu Meitei community”. 

The EGI team did not have the qualifications to make any comment on the issue which is a complex one. The Meiteis have their valid reasons for demanding ST status and the EGI is ill-qualified to pass a judgement on this. 

• Other Partisan Portrayals In The EGI Report

1. The EGI report said almost all Kuki-Zo churches were destroyed. While that is a fact, what the EGI team overlooked for obvious reasons was the desecration and destruction of temples and places of worship of the Meiteis by Kukis. 

2. The EGI report says that the Meiteis looted police armouries in order to gain access to weapons to attack Kukis. But it ignores the fact that it was the Kukis who initiated this process by looting arms from licensed arms shops and even from police stations in the hills. 

3. The report says that a lion’s share of funds meant for development is spent in Imphal Valley and only 10 per cent is allocated to the hill districts. 

This allegation is patently false. About 60 per cent of the annual budgetary allocation of the state is spent in Imphal Valley which, though it forms under 10 per cent of the state’s geographical area, hosts 60 per cent of the state’s population and also houses the state capital as well as vital installations. 

4. The EGI alleges that cadres of Imphal Valley-based insurgent groups led the Meitei mobs in attacks on Kukis in the Valley. But there is no evidence of this and even the Assam Rifles has not made any such allegation. 

5. The EGI report gives wide and unbridled publicity to wild allegations made by Kukis. One such is that Meitei mobs did not loot the police armouries, they (the mobs) were given weapons by the police. 

There is no evidence to support such allegations and a team that professes to be independent and unbiased ought to have refrained from giving publicity to such unsubstantiated allegations. 

6. Two Meitei radical groups — the Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun — are blamed for taking the lead in attacking and killing Kukis by the EGI, which also accuses CM Biren Singh and “political leadership” of the state of patronising these groups.

But no evidence is offered for substantiating this grave charge. 

• Blaming The Union Government

The EGI report blames the Union government for not imposing President’s Rule and dismissing the democratically-elected state government or invoking Article 355 to take over the law and order machinery of the state.

The Narendra Modi government has not dismissed any state government and has a firm policy against such measures that violate the norms of federalism. It has, thus, distinguished itself from the regimes of the past which used Article 356 very notoriously to dismiss state government, often on frivolous grounds. 

While saying that the Chief Minister’s “partisan actions pushed the state into turmoil”, the EGI criticises the Union government for appointing a security advisor (former DG of CRPF Kuldeip Singh) to report to the CM “who had proved incompetent to control the violence”. 

The creation of a unified command comprising the state police, Assam Rifles, CAPFs and Indian Army with the CM as its head was also criticised by the EGI: “Having caused the problem, he (CM Biren Singh) was rewarded by making him in-charge of finding the solution”. 

These criticisms mirror the charges levelled against the Union and Manipur governments by the Congress and other anti-BJP parties. The EGI report, thus, comes across as politically motivated. 

• Silence On Possession Of Sophisticated Arms And Open Display Of Such Arms By Kukis

The EGI report is conspicuously silent on possession of sophisticated Chinese and even US-made weapons by Kuki vigilante groups, the hate speeches made by Kukis or the calls for genocide against Meiteis issued openly by Kuli leaders. 

There are many videos in circulation of Kukis displaying the sophisticated arms in their possession and Kuki leaders making hate speeches. 

The EGI team would definitely have come across such videos during their four-day visit to Manipur. But the team chose to turn a blind eye to them because they would have negated the EGI’s false narrative that Meiteis are to blame for the ethnic violence.  

While rightly highlighting the sexual assault on two Kuki women by Meitei mobs (the videos of which have gone viral), the EGI report remains silent on horrific assaults on Meitei women by Kukis. 

• Vilification Of Meira Paibis

The EGI report vilifies Meira Paibis (literally meaning ‘women holding torches), a powerful women’s group, of aiding attacks on Kukis and stopping security forces from going to the aid of Kukis. 

“Meira Paibis have become the cheerleaders of violent mobs attacking Kuki homes,” the EGI report stated, adding that video clips of Meira Paibis urging (Meitei) men to rape and molest Kuki women have surfaced. 

While it is true that Meira Paibis have behaved atrociously and transgressed the law, there are also enough examples of Meira Paibis rescuing and protecting Kukis and preventing Meitei mobs from attacking Kukis and their properties. 

The EGI report, while speaking of videos of Meitei women urging men to commit atrocities on Kuki women, remains deafeningly silent of similar videos of Kuki community leaders urging Kuki men to kill Meitei men and take Meitei women as “mistresses”. 

Also, painting all Meira Paibis with the same brush is grossly unfair.

• Smear Job On Manipur Media

The EGI team’s report comes out as a smear job on the media — print, electronic and online — in Manipur that is mostly headquartered in Imphal.  

The report says that the Imphal-based media turned into ‘Meitei media’ and its reportage of the ethnic conflict was biased and partisan. 

The EGI team quotes an unnamed Kuki who alleges that most of the Imphal-based journalists “take dictation from the Chief Minister’s office”. 

Such a grave allegation needs to be properly attributed and cross-verified, but the EGI team did not bother doing so. 

The report, in fact, gave extensive space to many such unverified allegations made by Kukis who have not been named. 

The EGI team could have, in the very least, attempted to strike a balance and given space to the complaint and charges by the Imphal-based media houses of Kuki journalists reporting in a blatantly biased manner and following the dictates of Kuki militant groups.

The EGI report lists out a few instances of what it labels as ‘fake news and disinformation’ by the ‘Meitei media’. Had the EGI been objective, it should have listed out the many more instances of fake news in Kuki media outlets, especially the Kuki online media. But it failed to do so because of its obvious bias. 

• Giving A Clean Chit To The Assam Rifles

The EGI team appears to have bent over backwards to give a clean chit to the Assam Rifles which has been accused of late of siding with the Kukis. 

The Assam Rifles has been accused of failing to guard the India-Myanmar border and allowing largescale influx of people from the Chin-Kuki-Zo communities from Myanmar into India. 

Assam Rifles units stationed in the Kuki-dominated areas of the hill districts have, as is well known, very close ties with the local communities there. 

The Assam Rifles has also been accused of physically preventing the Manipur Police from carrying out manhunts against Kuki militants. A video of Assam Rifles soldiers blocking a road with their vehicles to prevent Manipur Police from intervening in an attack by Kuki militants on Meitei settlements had gone viral. 

It is also a fact that Kuki militants have, in their possession, many sophisticated weapons that are suspected to have been smuggled in from Myanmar. 

That represents a failure on the part of the Assam Rifles to check the smuggling of weapons from Myanmar. 

The EGI report is peppered with praise for the Assam Rifles and the fine job that the force is doing. The report blames Meiteis, including the Imphal-based media, for falsely targeting the Assam Rifles. 

It, thus, appears that a major objective of the EGI team was to give positive publicity to the Assam Rifles that has come under a lot of flak.

The sole redeeming feature of the EGI report was its criticism of the Internet ban in Manipur. The EGI report cogently argued against the ban and cited credible reports to underline the fact that Internet bans do not prevent violence. 

But apart from this, the EGI report is being seen as nothing but a hit job on Meiteis and the BJP-led governments in Manipur and at the Centre. The report reflects the political biases and leanings of the members of the team, and a large number of those who preside over the affairs of the guild.