STDCM vindicates demand for ST status
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, February 04 2019: While justifying the demand for inclusion of Meitei/Meetei in ST category, the Scheduled Tribe Demand Committee Manipur (STDCM) has asserted that the fairest modalities would be framed as far as the reservation question is concerned so that the old ST groups' interests are not compromised in any manner.

The committee has in the past clarified time and again in clear terms to dispel any misunderstanding regarding the demand and will continue to do so.

The recent ATSUM press note had several misleading interpretations of history and current socio-political reality to justify their opposition.

A statement issued by STDCM pointed out that ATSUM's assertion that the Meeteis/Meiteis are one of the most advanced communities in India falls flat in the first reading itself, and smacks of careless and motivated generalisation.

Manipur has the lowest per capita income (55,603) among the eight states.

To give a bird's-eye perspective showing that the illusion of "one of the most advanced communities" doesn't apply to any of the North-eastern States, the eight Northeast States contribute roughly 2.90% of the total GDP and this goes to show the region as a whole is still economically backward.

In this context, to paint a rosy picture of the socio-economic standing of the State as a whole and the Meetei/Meitei community in particular is just a mischievous act of self-aggrandizement by proxy which cannot be taken seriously at all.

Secondly, as for the religious aspect, it is not anywhere dictated in the Indian Constitution that a Hindu cannot be an ST.

The President of India promulgates who is an ST based on broad guidelines prescribed by the Lokur Committee and not based on rigid, specific definitions.

This begets another question: how much of a Hindu the Meeteis/Meiteis actually are? It will be prudent to remember TC Hodson's observation that Hinduism "exists in Manipur, solely in its exoteric form, without any of the subtle metaphysical doctrines which have been elaborated by the masters of esoteric Hinduism".

Several points illustrate how the Meeteis/Meiteis' practices are different from the orthodoxy of Hinduism such as in the non-practice of child marriage, practice of widow marriage and the freedom of women as evidenced by the economic autonomy and assertiveness of Meetei/Meitei women.

"Our centuries-old rituals, Umanglai worship, ancestral worship and our history of the practice ofhuman sacrifices all point to the fact that we are Animists in our soul.

The surging revivalist tendencies also reveal the desire to seek the pre-Hinduism roots which itself is a strong indication of our rootedness to ournatural world-view.

Also, the relevance we still attach to our clan system (Salai taret) should be noted as an indication of our tribalism", asserts STDCM.

ATSUM's press note had some glaring factual errors in their hurry to glorify Meeteis/Meiteis.

It is a baseless claim without any historical reference that the erstwhile Manipuri kingdom had extended her territory till China.

Also, there are no two chronicles but only one authoritative State chronicle which is the "Cheitharol Kumbaba", it pointed out.

"It is well within our constitutional rights to demand the ST status.

ATSUM should also keep in mind that our main agenda is land protection in the face of imminent demographic transformation so as to avoid the same fate of our indigenous Tripuri brothers and sisters.

Having understood the geopolitical reality of mainland assimilation programme, our Assamese brethren have been pro-active in their demand for ST.

ST status will redeem us in the face of sinister designs such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 (CAB)", it continued.

STDCM also asked if ATSUM can assume moral authority to similarly question the legitimacy of the "advanced" Tai-Ahoms' demand�the very glorious Ahoms who defeated the Mughals in the 'Battle of Saraighat'.

If Meetei/Meitei population is decimated in their own land, which is a genuine possibility in the foreseeable future, then it's not only the Meetei/Meitei's loss but a collective damage to the very idea of Manipur because Meeteis/Meiteis are as much a necessary component of the socio-historical ecology of Manipur as much as all the other communities are.

ATSUM's advice that "it will be advisable for the Meitei people to reflect back to the past grandeur and greatness their progenitors had enjoyed..." is not at all practical and absolutely unnecessary.

Living in the past is a wishful waste of time and an insult to the reality of the present, STDCM asserted.

Land protection is the main agenda of the ST demand and Meeteis/Meiteis do not fancy usurpation of land in the hills� the very land that Meetei/Meitei kings and soldiers helped protect from other hostile external forces.

As for the reservation question, the fairest modalities will be framed so that the old ST groups' interests are not grazed in any way (the same concerns are there in Assam and to address those, their cabinet subcommittee will do the needful as obviously will be the case in Manipur too).

It's a time for collective pragmatism and not parochial politics based on communal lines.

The Central Government will decide the eligibility of granting of ST status and so, it's not for any of the Organizations and pressure groups (both hills and plain) to conclude beforehand the suitability of the demand, it asserted.

ATSUM's assertion that "the social stigma, humiliation and excommunication that we [the current STs] are made to endure and to be branded as uncouth, uncivilized and being treated with utter contempt and disdain" in the context of the current Manipur is inaccurate as things have moved on from the regrettably hazy and rough phases of a certain historical milieu.

"It would do us all good to remember that, to the collective consciousness of the mainlanders, we are all the same- backward, primitive and inferior.

A Manipuri Kshatriya/Brahmin is a misnomer to them; and as much alien to them as the strict adherence of varna system is to us in our social reality today", STDCM continued.

"So, instead of digging up the historical graveyard to score brownie points, our politics need to evolve to that of solidarity, especially in today's time when the whole of the Northeast needs to show their strength (as illustrated by the massive protests regarding CAB, 2016)", it said.

STDCM will hold talks with the Chief Minister on February 6 and accordingly, based on the outcome of the said meeting, further steps will be taken, it added.

Comment