Hereditary Kuki chieftainship should be abolished
|
LB Singh
The term Old Kuki has been applied to the clans, which suddenly appeared in Cachar in about 1800. Aimol, Anal, Chawte (Chothe), Chiru, Kolhen (Koireng), Kom, Lamgang (Lamkhang), Purum, Tikhup, and Vaiphei were identified as the Old Kuki clans of Manipur (Lt Col J Shakespear 1912: p148-49). In addition, Koirao, Maring, Moyon, and Monsang were also regarded as Old Kuki clans. Most of the above tribes have now identified themselves as Naga. Renowned historian Lal Dena included Hmar and Gangte inthe Old Kuki clan. The Thadou, Zou, Paite, Mizo (Lushai), Ralte, Simte, Sema, Sukte, and Mate migrated to Manipur during and after the reign of Maharaja Nara Singh (1844 to 1850), and they are known as the New Kuki clans.
The Nagas and Kukis have a chieftainship system of village administration. The Naga and the Old Kuki Chiefs are not hereditary. The advice of the village elders and the council binds them. They do not claim ownership of the village land and forest. They don’t have legislative and military power and are not the village army’s commander-in-chief.
However, in the case of New Kuki clans like Thadou and kin tribes, the Chief is hereditary, and he may exercise authority against the wishes of the village elders and the council. They have supreme authority. He possess executive, judicial, legislative, and military power. He claims the ownership of the village land, including the forest. He is also the Commander-in-Chief of the village Army and is responsible for dealing with the militants.
According to “The Manipur Village Authority (Hill Area) Act 1956,” village authority elections were required WEF 1957, and permission was required to set up a new village. However, the Kuki National Assembly (KNA) objected to the Act, stating that it ignored Kuki’s way of life in the village. The Act also requires a minimum of 20 houses to establish a village. However, Thadou Kuki Chiefs are well known for establishing a village with a few houses, enabling them to make most of their sons village chiefs. Illegal Kuki-Chin immigrants from Myanmar or Bangladesh provide an opportunity for all the ambitious Kuki Chief’s sons to fulfill their aspiration to become village chiefs, and it also helps to change the delicate demography of the State in their favour. The number of Naga villages increased from 253 to 812 between 1881 and 2022, and the Kuki villages increased from 73 to above 1600 in the corresponding time.
All the other tribes in Manipur, including Meitei, were defanged. Only the Kuki Chiefs of New Kuki clans have a monopoly of military, executive, legislative, and legal power. Therefore, the Kuki Chiefs have acted aggressively with impunity towards the other ethnic groups living in the State. There were Naga-Kuki clash in 1992-94 and Paite-Kuki clash in 1997-98 before the present crisis with the Meitei.
The Kuki Chief’s word is the law within his chiefdom, and his decision is final. Villages who disobeyed were severely punished or expelled. He can allot village land to outsiders, including foreigners, and make them settle in the village as long they please him. This system is opposed to the very idea of democracy, and the villagers in the Kuki villages don’t have the right to freedom provided by the Constitution of India.
The Kuki Chief’s Association was formed in 1935 by the educated elite Thadou Kukis Chiefs, mostly retired government officers. They have ensured their future generations the monopoly of power and privilege. The Kuki Chiefs and their children have progressed immensely in the last century. However, many ordinary Kuki remain below the poverty line and are highly vulnerable to misinformation and exploitation by the poppy growers and drug mafia.
In February 1948, the chieftainship was abolished in the Chin Hills of Burma (Myanmar). Similarly, the Government of Assam passed the “Assam Lushai Hill District (Acquisition of Chief’s Rights) Bill” in 1954, and the rights and interests of the Chiefs became vested in the Government. In Tripura, the Panchayat System has replaced the institute of Kuki Chieftainship, which functions under the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council.
The Government of Manipur passed the “Manipur (Hill Areas) Acquisition of Chief’s Rights Act 1967.” However, the Act could not be implemented mainly due to objections from the politically powerful lobby of Kuki Chiefs. The Act also requires some amendments so that it is not discriminatory to any tribe. However, the State Government has been slumbering for the last 55 years. The Government should expedite the necessary amendment to the Act.
The traditional institute of chieftainship has already been abolished in Myanmar, Mizoram, and the other NE States. The democratically elected Chief has already replaced the hereditary Chief, except for the Kuki-Chin tribes of Manipur. The Government of India (GoI) should provide guidance and financial assistance to the State Government to implement the “Manipur (Hill Areas) Acquisition of Chief’s Rights Act 1967.” The chieftainship must be abolished for the peaceful coexistence of all the ethnic groups in Manipur.
There are reports of the involvement of foreign militants in the present crisis, and they can’t do so without the knowledge of the Kuki Chiefs. The GoI should constitute an inquiry by an appropriate authority to investigate the role of the Kuki Chiefs in planning the present crisis along with the local and foreign militants to create problems for the country.
The writer is a retired Captain of the Indian Navy
The term Old Kuki has been applied to the clans, which suddenly appeared in Cachar in about 1800. Aimol, Anal, Chawte (Chothe), Chiru, Kolhen (Koireng), Kom, Lamgang (Lamkhang), Purum, Tikhup, and Vaiphei were identified as the Old Kuki clans of Manipur (Lt Col J Shakespear 1912: p148-49). In addition, Koirao, Maring, Moyon, and Monsang were also regarded as Old Kuki clans. Most of the above tribes have now identified themselves as Naga. Renowned historian Lal Dena included Hmar and Gangte inthe Old Kuki clan. The Thadou, Zou, Paite, Mizo (Lushai), Ralte, Simte, Sema, Sukte, and Mate migrated to Manipur during and after the reign of Maharaja Nara Singh (1844 to 1850), and they are known as the New Kuki clans.
The Nagas and Kukis have a chieftainship system of village administration. The Naga and the Old Kuki Chiefs are not hereditary. The advice of the village elders and the council binds them. They do not claim ownership of the village land and forest. They don’t have legislative and military power and are not the village army’s commander-in-chief.
However, in the case of New Kuki clans like Thadou and kin tribes, the Chief is hereditary, and he may exercise authority against the wishes of the village elders and the council. They have supreme authority. He possess executive, judicial, legislative, and military power. He claims the ownership of the village land, including the forest. He is also the Commander-in-Chief of the village Army and is responsible for dealing with the militants.
According to “The Manipur Village Authority (Hill Area) Act 1956,” village authority elections were required WEF 1957, and permission was required to set up a new village. However, the Kuki National Assembly (KNA) objected to the Act, stating that it ignored Kuki’s way of life in the village. The Act also requires a minimum of 20 houses to establish a village. However, Thadou Kuki Chiefs are well known for establishing a village with a few houses, enabling them to make most of their sons village chiefs. Illegal Kuki-Chin immigrants from Myanmar or Bangladesh provide an opportunity for all the ambitious Kuki Chief’s sons to fulfill their aspiration to become village chiefs, and it also helps to change the delicate demography of the State in their favour. The number of Naga villages increased from 253 to 812 between 1881 and 2022, and the Kuki villages increased from 73 to above 1600 in the corresponding time.
All the other tribes in Manipur, including Meitei, were defanged. Only the Kuki Chiefs of New Kuki clans have a monopoly of military, executive, legislative, and legal power. Therefore, the Kuki Chiefs have acted aggressively with impunity towards the other ethnic groups living in the State. There were Naga-Kuki clash in 1992-94 and Paite-Kuki clash in 1997-98 before the present crisis with the Meitei.
The Kuki Chief’s word is the law within his chiefdom, and his decision is final. Villages who disobeyed were severely punished or expelled. He can allot village land to outsiders, including foreigners, and make them settle in the village as long they please him. This system is opposed to the very idea of democracy, and the villagers in the Kuki villages don’t have the right to freedom provided by the Constitution of India.
The Kuki Chief’s Association was formed in 1935 by the educated elite Thadou Kukis Chiefs, mostly retired government officers. They have ensured their future generations the monopoly of power and privilege. The Kuki Chiefs and their children have progressed immensely in the last century. However, many ordinary Kuki remain below the poverty line and are highly vulnerable to misinformation and exploitation by the poppy growers and drug mafia.
In February 1948, the chieftainship was abolished in the Chin Hills of Burma (Myanmar). Similarly, the Government of Assam passed the “Assam Lushai Hill District (Acquisition of Chief’s Rights) Bill” in 1954, and the rights and interests of the Chiefs became vested in the Government. In Tripura, the Panchayat System has replaced the institute of Kuki Chieftainship, which functions under the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council.
The Government of Manipur passed the “Manipur (Hill Areas) Acquisition of Chief’s Rights Act 1967.” However, the Act could not be implemented mainly due to objections from the politically powerful lobby of Kuki Chiefs. The Act also requires some amendments so that it is not discriminatory to any tribe. However, the State Government has been slumbering for the last 55 years. The Government should expedite the necessary amendment to the Act.
The traditional institute of chieftainship has already been abolished in Myanmar, Mizoram, and the other NE States. The democratically elected Chief has already replaced the hereditary Chief, except for the Kuki-Chin tribes of Manipur. The Government of India (GoI) should provide guidance and financial assistance to the State Government to implement the “Manipur (Hill Areas) Acquisition of Chief’s Rights Act 1967.” The chieftainship must be abolished for the peaceful coexistence of all the ethnic groups in Manipur.
There are reports of the involvement of foreign militants in the present crisis, and they can’t do so without the knowledge of the Kuki Chiefs. The GoI should constitute an inquiry by an appropriate authority to investigate the role of the Kuki Chiefs in planning the present crisis along with the local and foreign militants to create problems for the country.
The writer is a retired Captain of the Indian Navy