Why Do EGI and PUCL Peddle Lies About Manipur Crisis

As misinformation and disinformation paint one community as the blameless victim of Manipur’s violence, the Editors’ Guild of India (EGI) released a so-called "fact-finding report" in September 2023, which drew sharp criticism for its false and lopsided narratives. Not to be outdone, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) again churned out another “People’s Tribunal” report from its factory of lies, echoing EGI’s skewed perspective, further clouding the truth about the conflict, stoking division, and eroding trust in these groups. By framing Meiteis as aggressors and Kukis as victims, it creates a fractured “world of reality” that alienates entire communities and undermines reconciliation. Both Meiteis and Kukis have suffered immense loss, but EGI and PUCL’s selective narrative widens the gap between them, making peace harder. 

The EGI, much like the PUCL, has faced backlash for its September 2023 fact-finding report on the Manipur crisis, which the state forest department slammed as false and misleading, rejecting claims as “concocted” and baseless due to EGI’s failure to consult the department or verify information before publication. This shoddy reporting, echoing PUCL’s biased “People’s Tribunals,” risks spreading misinformation, and misleading the public and authorities. The department noted that 18 forest offices, bungalows, and quarters in Kuki-dominated areas were destroyed by violent mobs since May 3, 2023, with an FIR lodged at Churachandpur police station, highlighting EGI’s one-sided narrative. The question is, how long will such fake reports continue to surface? Until the government acts with an iron hand, propaganda groups like EGI and PUCL will keep churning out reports that destabilize the state and keep the pot boiling, eroding trust in their credibility and fueling unrest.

Without any doubt, the PUCL has mislead the public by using the term "People’s Tribunal" to present one-sided narratives, falsely implying judicial authority akin to government agencies, despite lacking any legal standing under India’s Constitution, which reserves the creation of tribunals—a state function under Articles 323A and 323B—exclusively for Parliament or state legislatures. PUCL’s so-called "tribunals," informal inquiries led by retired judges or left leaning activists, have no binding authority, cannot enforce judgments, and often prioritize advocacy over impartiality, risking misinformation and disinformation by mimicking official judicial processes. While NGOs can legitimately contribute through legal advocacy, Public Interest Litigation, legal aid, and verifiable documentation, PUCL’s deceptive use of the term "tribunal" erodes public trust in India’s justice system and misguides common people by cloaking its activism in a veneer of judicial legitimacy.

In its coverage of the Manipur crisis, the PUCL crafts a biased narrative that skews the conflict’s origins and portrays ethnic groups unfairly, potentially shaping readers’ views in a misleading way. Terms like “valley district patrolled by armed youth groups” and “hill district inaccessible to Meitei police and politicians” suggest that armed militancy is unique to valley areas, glossing over the fact that both sides have armed groups. 

This selective wording muddies the truth, where both communities have victims and perpetrators, pushing a one-sided perspective that risks escalating tensions. Such slanted reporting undermines PUCL’s credibility as an impartial observer. By peddling a one-sided narrative that vilifies the Meitei community and the BJP government while whitewashing Kuki actions, PUCL has not only failed Manipur but also betrayed its own mission of upholding justice. Even King Dhritarashtra, the blind monarch of the Mahabharata, would decry at the lies and half-truths spun in this report.

The PUCL’s report is a masterclass in selective storytelling. It claims Kuki communities were driven from the valley areas of the state while Meiteis voluntarily left the hills. This is a brazen inversion of reality. Meiteis were forcibly displaced from Kuki-dominated hill areas on May 3 from Churachandpur, Moreh, and Kangpokpi often under threat of violence, while Kukis fled the valley amid escalating chaos after May 3. Such distortions aren’t mere oversights—they reflect a deliberate choice to push an ideological agenda. PUCL’s narrative, which paints the Meiteis and the BJP as sole culprits, dismisses inconvenient truths, like the coordinated attacks on Meitei homes in Torbung Bangla or the systematic torching of forest offices in Churachandpur, Kangpokpi, and Tengnoupal on May 3, 2023.

Meanwhile, the Union Home Minister Amit Shah's misunderstanding that the Manipur High Court’s April 19, 2023, order to consider Scheduled Tribe status for Meiteis sparked the violence is a convenient oversimplification. The order was not a mandate to grant ST status but a directive to evaluate a long-standing Meitei demand, rooted in their economic and social marginalization. If this was the sole trigger, how does one explain the rapid, seemingly premeditated escalation that followed? On May 3, 2023, the All Tribal Students’ Union of Manipur organized a Tribal Solidarity March in hill districts to protest the order. In Churachandpur, the rally turned violent, with coordinated attacks suggesting a deeper agenda. By pinning the blame on the court order, the Home Ministry sidesteps structural and historical factors, including geopolitical context offering a simplistic narrative that obscures the truth and shields those who orchestrated the violence.

The destruction of forest offices on May 3, 2023, is a glaring example of PUCL’s selective blindness. Seven offices in Churachandpur, five in Kangpokpi, and two in Tengnoupal were torched, with physical files, maps, and equipment reduced to ashes. An attempt to burn the Jiribam DFO office was thwarted, but the pattern was clear: these were not random acts but a calculated campaign. Why would a protest against ST status for Meiteis target forest offices? The answer may lie in the state’s crackdown on illegal poppy plantations and encroachments of reserve forest areas in Kuki-dominated hill areas, which had already sparked protests by groups like the Kuki Students’ Organisation in March 2023. PUCL’s report, however, ignores this context, failing to question why a “peace rally” led to such destruction. This isn’t just shoddy reporting—it’s a deliberate attempt to sanitize one community’s actions while demonizing another.

The failure to address the root causes of Manipur’s violence is not limited to private bodies; it is equally evident in the actions—or inaction—of the state’s political leadership. Both the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and the opposition Congress have displayed a remarkable inability to grasp the underlying dynamics of the conflict. The BJP, which governs both Manipur and the central government, has leaned heavily on the High Court order as a convenient scapegoat, avoiding any serious engagement with the structural issues that have long plagued the state. 

The opposition, meanwhile, has been quick to criticize the government but has offered little in the way of constructive solutions, often resorting to populist rhetoric that further inflames tensions.Manipur violence is not merely a clash between ethnic groups; it is a communal conflict rooted in historical grievances, economic disparities, and political manipulations. The state’s complex demographic makeup, with Meiteis, Kukis, Nagas, and other communities coexisting in a delicate balance, has been disrupted by decades of neglect, Constitutional missteps, mismanagement, and external interference. Issues such as land ownership and access to resources have long been points of contention. The demand for ST status by the Meiteis, for instance, is not just about affirmative action; it is tied to their perception of being marginalized in their own state. 

Yet, neither the BJP nor the opposition has shown the political will to address these structural issues. Instead, both have engaged in what can only be described as strategic maneuvering, using the conflict to bolster their electoral prospects or deflect criticism. The BJP’s narrative of “development” and “national integration” rings hollow in a state where basic governance has collapsed, and security forces have struggled to maintain order. The opposition’s attempts to pin the blame solely on the BJP ignore the fact that ethnic tensions in Manipur predate the current government, their failed policies, and require a bipartisan approach to resolve.

Manipur’s location on India’s border with Myanmar adds a geopolitical dimension to the conflict that cannot be ignored. The porous border has long facilitated the influx of illegal immigrations which facilitates the flow of arms, drugs, and militant groups, many of which exploit ethnic divisions to further their agendas. The 2023 violence saw an alarming proliferation of sophisticated weapons in the hands of civilian militias, raising questions about their origins. Local reports suggest that some of these arms may have crossed the border from Myanmar, where ongoing conflict has created a thriving black market. This external influence exacerbates Manipur’s internal tensions, turning local grievances into a broader security threat.

Considering these problems, the private bodies like the EGI and PUCL, by failing to interrogate this geopolitical context, inadvertently provide cover for the state’s complicity. Their one-sided reports, which focus on specifically targeting one community without examining the structural and external factors, allow the state to deflect responsibility. A truly independent investigation would confront these strategic maneuvers, exposing how the state’s policies—or lack thereof—have contributed to the crisis. 

Narratives matter because they shape perceptions, influence policy, and determine how resources are allocated in conflict zones. When private bodies produce reports that lack balance, they contribute to a fractured “world of reality” that is not only incomplete but also divisive. The present PUCL report is a stark reminder of how one-sided narratives can deepen communal divides. The report’s failure to acknowledge the Kuki community’s role in initiating violence, such as the burning of forest offices and attacks on Meitei homes, blocking of free movements by controlling National Highways, creates a distorted reality that undermines peacebuilding efforts.

In Manipur, where trust between communities is already fragile, such narratives are a curse, not a cure. They widen the gap between Meiteis, Kukis, and other groups, making reconciliation and coexistence ever more difficult. The PUCL’s 694 pages with its one-sided narrative and distorted facts, is not a solution but part of the problem, fueling mistrust and division. Only through reflexivity, balance, and a commitment to truth can we bridge the gaps that divide Manipur.

When every door has been closed for the Kuki to play the victim card and demand a separate administration—denied by Central government—they have turned to PUCL as a medium to blame the failure of the state and Centre for the Manipur violence. By projecting Meiteis as the aggressors, as seen in EGI’s equally biased fact-finding report, PUCL acts as a mouthpiece of the Kukis. When PUCL’s narrative fails, another organization will likely emerge to carry the same torch.

Manipur is under siege by groups like EGI and PUCL, and the state cannot be held hostage any longer! The government must not stand by as a silent bystander, blindly ignoring the crisis. Just by browsing a few websites and screenshotting social media comments as reports, we cannot remain blind to the truth. These groups will never stop to find various tricks to destroy our beautiful state. Act now with urgency to protect Manipur!