Shirui Lily Festival 2025: Manipur erupts with fresh protest

Shirui Lily Festival 2025: Manipur erupts with fresh protest

Recent Controversy over Shirui Lily Festival Coverage

A controversy erupted in Manipur when security personnel allegedly stopped 20 journalists from covering the Shirui Lily Festival in Ukhrul district, a Naga-majority area. The journalists, traveling in a government bus marked “Manipur State Transport,” were asked to conceal the signage at the Gwaltabi checkpoint near Imphal. Following this directive, they returned to Imphal instead of proceeding to the festival, which was inaugurated the same day by Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla.

The event had already drawn attention after an FIR was filed against a Kuki student leader for allegedly threatening that Meiteis would not be allowed to attend the festival amid ethnic tensions.

The All Manipur Working Journalists’ Union and the Editors’ Guild Manipur condemned the obstruction and submitted a letter to the Governor demanding a probe. They emphasized that the media bus was officially arranged by the state’s Directorate of Information and Public Relations.

In protest, the journalists’ unions declared a “pen-down strike” on May 21, suspending all journalistic work and boycotting news coverage related to the Manipur government.

Let’s Understand the Present turmoil in Manipur for last 2 years. Here are genesis of  ethnic violence in Manipur

Manipur’s Ethnic Composition (Brief Overview)

Manipur has a deep ethnic divide between the Imphal Valley and the surrounding hill areas. The valley, accounting for just 10% of the state’s land, is inhabited by the non-tribal Meitei community, which comprises over 64% of the population and holds a political majority with 40 out of 60 Assembly seats.

In contrast, the hill areas, covering 90% of the state’s geography, are home to over 35% of the population, belonging to 33 recognised tribal groups broadly classified as ‘Any Naga tribes’ and ‘Any Kuki tribes’. These groups are represented by only 20 MLAs.

Religiously, most Meiteis are Hindus, followed by a minority of Muslims, while the tribal groups are predominantly Christians. Recent tensions escalated after the Manipur High Court asked the State to consider granting Scheduled Tribe (ST) status to the Meiteis.

Meitei Argument for ST Status

The Scheduled Tribe Demand Committee of Manipur (STDCM) has demanded ST status for Meiteis since 2012, arguing they were historically a tribe before Manipur’s 1949 merger with India. They claim ST status is essential to preserve their cultural identity, ancestral lands, language, and traditions.

The Meiteis highlight that while tribal groups can purchase land in the Imphal Valley, Meiteis are barred from buying land in the surrounding hills, leading to a sense of marginalisation and insecurity. Their share of the population declined from 59% in 1951 to 44% in 2011, with additional fears over the proposed Greater Nagalim reducing Manipur’s territory.

They also express concern over the influx of migrants from Myanmar after the permit system was abolished and have long demanded an Inner Line Permit (ILP) to restrict outsider entry. Meiteis argue they face job disadvantages, as STs enjoy reservation benefits in government jobs—the largest employment sector in the state. Infrastructure expansion, like new rail links, has only amplified their anxieties.

Why Are Tribal Groups Opposed to ST Status for Meiteis?

The tribal communities, especially Kukis and Nagas, strongly oppose granting ST status to Meiteis. They argue that Meiteis already enjoy significant advantages: they constitute over 64% of the population, dominate the Assembly, and are academically and economically ahead.

Tribal groups fear that ST status would allow Meiteis to buy land in the hill areas, displacing tribal residents and violating constitutional protections of tribal land.

They also note that Meiteis already benefit from reservations under SC, OBC, or EWS categories, and their language, Manipuri, is in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution.

Furthermore, tribals highlight that while they occupy 90% of the land, most government funds and infrastructure development are concentrated in the Meitei-dominated Imphal Valley. They view the ST demand as a threat to tribal autonomy, land ownership, and rights.

 Process of Inclusion in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) List

The inclusion of a community in the ST list begins with a recommendation from the State Government, which is reviewed by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

It is then sent to the Registrar General of India (RGI) under the Ministry of Home Affairs for approval.

Next, the proposal is forwarded to the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) for its opinion.

If approved, the matter is placed before the Union Cabinet, and a bill is introduced in Parliament to amend the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.

After passage in both Houses of Parliament, the President of India issues the final notification under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.

What Led to the Unrest in Manipur?

The unrest in Manipur stems from long-standing ethnic tensions, with forest eviction drives and the demand for ST status by Meiteis acting as recent flashpoints.

In the 2020 delimitation process, Meiteis claimed under representation due to faulty Census data, while tribal groups argued that their growing population (around 40%) was still politically sidelined

The 2021 Myanmar coup triggered an influx of refugees, leading to new settlements in Churachandpur, which Meitei leaders viewed as illegal encroachments. The state’s anti-drug campaign, targeting poppy fields, also escalated tensions, as tribal groups claimed it was being used to target them.

Violence broke out following the eviction of residents from 38 Kuki villages declared as illegal in protected forest areas. Kuki groups alleged this violated Article 371C, which protects hill areas and mandates oversight through the Hill Area Committee.

Matters worsened when the state withdrew from ceasefire agreements with two Kuki insurgent groups, accusing them of inciting protests. These events, combined with historic distrust, have led to widespread ethnic clashes and instability in the state.

Conclusion:

The ongoing conflict in Manipur is rooted in a complex interplay of ethnic identity, political representation, land rights, and historical grievances. The demand for Scheduled Tribe status by the Meitei community has intensified fears among the tribal groups—particularly the Kukis and Nagas—who see it as a threat to their constitutional protections and cultural autonomy. At the same time, Meiteis argue that such recognition is necessary to preserve their heritage and protect their socio-political interests in a changing demographic landscape.

The situation has been further aggravated by contentious forest evictions, migration concerns from across the Myanmar border, and imbalances in development and governance. The recent unrest underscores the urgent need for a balanced, inclusive, and sensitive political solution that respects the aspirations of all communities while upholding constitutional safeguards and promoting peace and stability in the region.