Advertisement
TWO Kuki women were sexually assaulted on May 4. The disturbances in Manipur had started a day earlier, after the High Court’s direction to the government regarding the Meiteis’ demand for Scheduled Tribe (ST) status.
A communal angle is sought to be introduced into the tragedy that has befallen Manipur.
The court order that led to the violence was only an excuse to kill and maim. The enmity between the Kukis and the Meiteis is as old as the hills where the Kukis reside. The Kukis (and other tribes) occupy 90 per cent of the landmass in the state. The Meiteis, who reside in the plains, occupy the remaining 10 per cent. But the Meiteis are more numerous and economically better off since political power has been in their hands since the state came into existence.
Yet, like Oliver Twist in the Charles Dickens novel, they want more — hence, the demand to be classified as an ST so that the Meiteis become eligible for tribal land, which at present cannot be owned by anyone other than a tribal. The court ruled in favour of the Meiteis. But is it for courts to say who is a tribal? That should be left to the elected government. If while deciding on the issue the government ignores the rules on the subject, only then should the judiciary intervene. I do not know if that state had been reached.
The Meiteis appear to be of Indo-Burman stock, like the Nagas, Mizos, Khasis and the Garos of Meghalaya and the Bodos of Assam. But they have been Hindu Vaishnavites for centuries. I learn that the Kukis originally wanted to be included in the Hindu fold, but were not welcomed because they were not born Hindus. In Hinduism, a caste can be assigned only by the accident of birth. If that test was applied, the Meiteis could not claim tribal status.
Tribal communities were basically animists. Most Kukis converted to Christianity two centuries ago in colonial times. Some Meiteis are Christians, converted from Hinduism much later. I learnt of their existence only when worshippers in my church began praying for them and for peace to prevail. It was said that some 300-odd churches in the valley were burnt or destroyed. I thought it was truly amazing that so many churches were built when believers counted for just over a lakh! I presume that Kukis staying in the plains added substantially to that number.
A communal angle is sought to be introduced into the tragedy that has befallen Manipur. I would have rejected that charge off-hand, knowing well that the Meitei-Kuki animosity preceded the conversions to Christianity. But the hate campaigns propagated by rabid extremist elements in the last decade sowed in me a seed of doubt.
Rajat Kumar Sethi had been appointed to guide the inexperienced N Biren Singh when he was installed as the Chief Minister of Manipur. What has happened to him? We have not heard of him nor read about him in the media for some time now. The complaint against Biren Singh is that, firstly, he is incompetent (that is proved) and secondly, he has aggravated the dissensions and distrust between the Meiteis and the Kukis by utilising religion as a tool (that sounds plausible).
Our Prime Minister said he was surprised when during his travels abroad he was asked about the ill-treatment of Muslims in India. He blamed critics of his government for his embarrassment. I refuse to believe that he is not aware of the fear generated in Indian Muslim minds due to the divisive hate politics that has taken root in our land in the last decade. His interest in consolidating Hindu votes for electoral gains and the parallel RSS agenda of doing the same to create a Hindu Rashtra necessitated the denigration of the minorities, forgetting that a country centred purely on religion could soon deteriorate into a failed state like our neighbour to our west.
The disrobing of the two Kuki women involved a mob of Meitei men, egged on by their womenfolk! The husband of one of the two women had served in the Army for 28 years. He was sorely disappointed that his own people had dishonoured his wife and he was not there to protect her. He had seen action in Sri Lanka and Siachen and this was what he got in return.
There are questions that Biren Singh and the DGP of Manipur must answer:
1. The incident occurred on May 4 in the presence of the police. When did the police party make its report? What did the party say?
2. If it did not report the ghastly incident of stripping of the two women and the subsequent rape of the younger woman, what action was taken against the policeman, especially as it is now alleged that it was the police who handed over the women to the mob?
3. A zero FIR of the incident was registered on May 18 at a nearby police station. Were the facts brought to the notice of the higher police authorities at least then? If not, who failed to inform them?
4. The zero FIR was finally transferred a month later to the police station under whose jurisdiction the crime was committed. Why did that take so long?
5. Why did the police not arrest the culprits earlier? They only acted when the Prime Minister and the Chief Minister were compelled to issue statements to condemn the perpetrators. Does it require the permission of the Chief Minister to prosecute or arrest such law-breakers?
It is not possible that the Chief Minister and the DGP did not know about the commission of this dastardly crime till a video clip of the incident went viral just before the start of the Monsoon Session of Parliament last week. It shows that patriarchy is deeply imbedded in the psyche of most BJP leaders. That is why champion women wrestlers were forced to come out on the roads to protest and why murderers and rapists in the 2002 Gujarat riot cases were released after only a few years in jail, though they were sentenced to life imprisonment.