Imphal: Thadou Inpi Manipur and the Meitei Alliance have together submitted a memorandum to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, demanding deletion of “Any Kuki Tribes” (AKT) from the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list of Manipur, as listed under Article 342 of the Constitution of India.
The appeal came following the official stance of the Government of Manipur recommended deleting Kuki from the list through cabinet decisions taken on October 19, 2018, and January 2, 2023. A letter to this effect was sent by the state government to the ministry on February 8, 2023.
The memorandum of the Thadou and Meitei bodies claimed that the inclusion of AKT in 2003 was done through politically motivated and non-transparent means, and lacks any constitutional, ethnographic, or administrative basis. It stated that AKT is an ambiguous and arbitrary classification, unlike other Scheduled Tribes in Manipur, which are clearly defined by linguistic and cultural distinctiveness. They argued that the entry of AKT has only led to confusion, tension, and division among communities in the state.
The groups also argue that the AKT category is not accepted by any of the recognised Scheduled Tribes of Manipur, including the Thadou, Paite, Hmar, Zou, Gangte, Simte, Aimol, Vaiphei, Kom, and others, nor by the Meitei or the Naga communities. Rather than promoting inclusion, they contend, the existence of AKT has worsened ethnic tensions and disrupted social harmony.
The memorandum stated that AKT essentially duplicates the already recognised Thadou tribe, which has been part of India’s official Census since 1951. The 2011 Census recorded the Thadou population in Manipur at 2,15,913, while AKT, introduced later, registered a population of 28,306, raising serious questions about the legitimacy and possible duplication of tribal identities.
“The petition recalls that broad colonial classifications such as ‘Any Kuki Tribe’ and ‘Any Naga Tribe’ were used temporarily during the early 1950s but were removed in 1956 after detailed verification by the Kaka Kalelkar Commission. Only ‘Any Mizo (Lushai)’ was retained, and that too for linguistic reasons. The reappearance of ‘Any Kuki Tribes’ in 2003, the memorandum claims, violated the settled constitutional and ethnographic framework.”
The groups also refuted the claim that ‘Kuki’ is a legitimate tribal identity. They asserted that it is not a distinct tribe, language, or culture, but rather a loosely used political label without scientific or ethnological grounding. According to them, this label is often exploited to create multiple sub-identities, some of which have been linked to illegal immigrants or foreigners—by attaching suffixes like Khongsai-Kuki or Doungel-Kuki.
They argued that the broad and vague nature of the AKT classification makes it susceptible to abuse, allowing even foreigners to claim tribal rights in Manipur. They pointed to the massive tribal certificate scam in Maharashtra, where more than 10 lakh fake Scheduled Tribe certificates were issued over the years, as a potential parallel.
The memorandum explained that several family or clan names like Haokip, Kipgen, Doungel, Guite, and Sitlhou have been wrongly listed under AKT. These names, the petitioners said, are either sub-clans of the Thadou or belong to other recognised tribes such as the Paite or Vaiphei. “Their reclassification under AKT has further contributed to confusion and redundancy in the state’s ST list.”
It said the inclusion of AKT is inconsistent with the established framework for recognising Scheduled Tribes. While all other tribes in Manipur’s ST list have clearly defined ethnographic profiles, AKT lacks a unique language, cultural heritage, or geographical isolation—the three main criteria required for ST recognition under Article 342. This makes AKT a legal anomaly and a source of ethnic discord.
The Thadou Inpi Manipur and Meitei Alliance stressed that there is no justification for the continued existence of AKT in the ST list. They warned that recognising sub-groups as separate tribes could lead to endless fragmentation and weaken the unity of recognised communities. They also argued that references to the use of ‘Kuki’ in Assam, Meghalaya, or Nagaland are not relevant in the case of Manipur, which already has a well-established and detailed tribal classification system.
The ‘Any Kuki Tribes’ should be removed from the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur without renaming or replacing it with any similar terminology, the two groups said. They emphasised that such a step is necessary to preserve constitutional integrity, uphold the rights of genuine Scheduled Tribes, and ensure long-term peace and harmony among communities in the state.
