Ngaranmi Shimray
New Delhi
The idea to explore ways and means of interpreting or amending the Manipur (Village Authorities in Hill Areas) Act, 1956 and the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils Act, 1971 to facilitate loans against land in hill areas is wishful thinking and a waste of time. The situation has changed, and the tribes in the hill areas will only be postponing the inevitable. It is better to secure autonomy now and march ahead than to procrastinate and receive it much later.
It is understood that Naga national hardliners are likely to stick to the old refrain of sovereignty after patiently hoping for three decades that the Government of India would meet them halfway to settle the Naga issue honorably. This change in stance has opened up a fresh opportunity for civil society organizations (CSOs), both Naga and Kuki, to adopt a pragmatic approach and advocate for solutions that are viable under the current circumstances. They have witnessed the tremendous progress made by other tribes in the region under the Sixth Schedule, sadly denied to them.
In Meghalaya, for instance, Autonomous District Councils possess the power to make laws on social and customary practices with the simple assent of the Governor. They have enacted land laws that enable communities to obtain loans from banks and financial institutions.
Meanwhile, Manipur remains trapped in unproductive friction. The primary goal for the tribes in the hill areas of Manipur should be overcoming legislative bottlenecks.
The Hill Areas Committee (HAC), constituted under Article 371C and guided by the Presidential Order of June 20, 1972, has struggled to operate as intended due to the obstructive and domineering mindset of the majority community, which is intent on suppressing tribal interests as it maintains a legislative majority.
To overcome this obstacle, the most practical approach is to renew efforts to extend the Sixth Schedule to the hill areas of Manipur, as astute tribal leaders in the past have long recognized. A structure akin to the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) or Meghalaya's ADCs, empowering local councils to enact laws with the Governor's assent while bypassing the state assembly, is precisely what the Manipur hill areas require.
The Constitutional Framework and Historical Context
Article 244(2) of the Constitution empowers ADCs and Territorial Councils (TCs) in Sixth Schedule areas to legislate on customary and social practices without state legislative involvement. Nagaland and Mizoram have these rights under Article 371A and Article 371G. The hill tribes of Manipur are painfully aware of the autonomy enjoyed by the Khasis, Jaintias, and Garos and others through these arrangements, and they rue the absence of similar benefits.
In fact, Manipur is the sole state in the region where hill tribes are deprived of legislative power over their traditional and cultural rights.
While Article 371C was designed to bridge this gap, the majority community's resistance has prevented the HAC’s recommendatory resolutions from functioning effectively. A case in point is the ADC Bill of 2021, recommended by a HAC resolution, which stalled before completing the process outlined in the 1972 Presidential Order.
Tribal CSOs must now urge communities to renew their efforts toward this goal. The tribals of Tripura and the Bodos of Assam fought for their rights from the 1960s to preserve their cultural practices, ultimately securing benefits under Article 244(2). Manipur's tribes have demanded these rights before statehood in 1972, facing persistent obstruction.
Rather than engaging in a fratricidal conflict that yields no solutions while increasing civilian casualties, Naga and Kuki tribes should direct their energy towards renewing their demand for ADCs and TCs. Such autonomous governance will help monetize land, enable credit access for individuals and businesses, and foster economic prosperity. With prosperity, differences will recede, allowing youth to focus on education and skill development.
Moving Beyond Violence
The violence witnessed since early 2026 suggests that the presence of firearms has emboldened some youths to pursue goals through bloodshed. History demonstrates that this approach fails. While one party may temporarily gain the upper hand now, the situation inevitably shifts when the opposition reorganizes. Such conflicts result in senseless cycles of violence that harm innocent villagers without yielding political or territorial gains.
Given the heavy deployment of state security forces, permanent territorial conquests or acquisitions are impossible, and any victories will be short-lived and hollow. Leadership on all sides must let good sense prevail, halt the violence, and redirect their energy toward peaceful negotiations.
The Economic Case for Autonomy
Banking facilities are vital for infusing funds into economic activities and generating employment in the hill areas. However, the region lacks the legal mechanisms required for institutional lending.
Relying on amendments to existing state-legislated laws or fresh law-making efforts through the legislative assembly is futile. The fastest and most effective path forward is a concerted demand for the Sixth Schedule to secure autonomous legislative powers for the ADCs and TCs.
All thoughts of inter-community conflict must be abandoned
Leaders should rally around the Sixth Schedule with renewed vigour, secure this foundational demand, and then engage in broader nation-building. The demand for a separate administration can be deferred to a more opportune time. The Bodoland movement, despite encompassing a much larger territory and population, settled for the BTC, which successfully delivered autonomy and progress.
Furthermore, Article 244A of the Constitution offers the possibility of a "state within a state." Invoked once for Meghalaya in April 1970, it paved the way for full statehood. While this pathway exists, progress should be pursued step-by-step.
First, secure social and customary lawmaking powers under Article 244(2) via the Sixth Schedule, complete with expanded functions like direct central funding and limited police powers, akin to the BTC. Without a land law rooted in customary practices, prosperity remains out of reach for the masses.
The hill areas require a legal system governing tribal land rights, records, mortgage creation, and recovery that is compatible with tribal land protection. This must establish a secure credit mechanism without sacrificing the protective character of the hill areas, drafted by the ADC or TC and assented to by the Governor.
Overcoming Legislative Obstacles
All existing laws applicable to the hill areas are enacted by the State Assembly after HAC gives its consent or views. Arguments that state-legislated amendments can resolve land issues are unconvincing, as those laws were framed for entirely different objectives. Furthermore, all amendments must pass through the state assembly, the very hurdle hill tribes have failed to clear since 1972.
Laws enacted directly by an ADC or TC require only the Governor's assent, completely bypassing the state government and assembly.
The majority community has consistently blocked beneficial legislation, including the ADC 2021 Bill. Without independent legislative powers vested in ADCs or TCs, the majority community will continue to obstruct tribal rights initiatives. Securing the Sixth Schedule under Article 244(2) arrangement is the only way to break this deadlock.
The majority community has repeatedly misled the tribes by claiming that Article 371C grants legislative power to the HAC, when its role is merely recommendatory. Even when recommendations are made, the state cabinet stalls the process. For example, the ADC 2021 Bill remains shelved. Rule 12A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur, 1972 states that the Council shall normally give effect to HAC recommendations, or refer disagreements to the Governor for a final, binding decision. The state cabinet bypassed this procedure.
Additionally, recommendations to extend the Sixth Schedule were sidelined by attached conditions concerning "local adjustments and amendments." When the Government of India requested clarification, the state government remained unresponsive, effectively shelving the proposal. Any measure dependent on the state assembly and government will fail as long as the majority maintains its current mindset and legislative dominance. Temporary alliances with the dominant community serve only short-term interests, with ultimately the tribes remaining a minority facing systemic suppression unless they unite.
To secure customary-based land laws and substantial local governance, the straightforward path is the Sixth Schedule under Article 244(2). For both Naga and Kuki tribes, working together to achieve this primary goal is in their long-term interest. By setting aside their differences, both communities can unite and demand in one concerted voice for true autonomy in the hill areas.
Pragmatism and Christian spirit dictate that it is futile at this age and time to engage in violence, but prudent to realise and appreciate the hard realities of life without going through the cycle of bitter regrets and to press the reset button to “Give Peace A Chance”.
