Introduction

Tribal situation in Nort East

As a fast developing country, India under its liberalised economy has aspired to tap the resources of North East under the aegis of beautifully orchestrated developmental banners like the Look East Policy, Vision 2020, New Exploration Licensing Policy etc which targets the liquidation mineral resources which are mostly in the Tribal Belts and presumably have never been explored since the origin of the earth. Indeed, the seven sisters and their cousin are endowed with rich natural resources which even have been identified as bio-diversity hotspot hosting species rich tropical rain forest and supports a diverse collection of flora and fauna. This region covers only 7.9 per cent of the countries geographical area and is being merely occupied about 3.8 per cent of the country’s total population. The forest area of this region constitutes of about 52 per cent of the total geographical area. Reserves of petroleum and natural gas in the region constitutes a fifth of the country’s total potential (ITALIA 2011). This strategically important region is surrounded by four countries namely China, Myanmar, Bhutan and Bangladesh and is connected to the rest of India through a narrow corridor in West Bengal.

Tossed between these resources and the state, the tribal population in North East have become vulnerable towards the safety and security of their land, freedom and culture. Hussain (2008) opines: “North East India is the home for innumerable nationalities, national minorities and ethnic groups belonging to different races, colours, religious persuasions and linguistic groups; all standing at visibly uneven levels of socio-economic development.”

1.3: Tribal situation in Manipur

Manipur is a state located in the far North Eastern corner of India bordering with Myanmar to its south and Bangladesh to its east. Its geographical area of the state is 22,327 sq. km which is divided into two regions viz. the Valley/ Plain area which covers 2,248 sq. kms and the Hill areas which occupies 20,079 sq. kms. The plain area is occupied basically by the Meitei community including fractions of Muslims and some tribes. There are about 37 tribal communities in the state, out of which 33 has been specified as Scheduled Tribes under the constitution of India. Majority of these tribal communities inhabit the hills. Nearly 90 percent of the state geographical area falls under hills areas. The hills areas are divided into five revenue districts namely Churachandpur, Chandel, Ukhrul, Senapati and Tamenglong and the plain areas have four districts. The tribal populations represent 38.43 percent of the total state population to the 2001 census. These tribes are again divided according to ethnic origin into the Nagas and the Non-Nagas who has their own customary laws and ways of living though similar in many ways. The non-Naga tribes are popularly known by a nickname “CHIKIMZ” representing the Chin-Kuki-Mizo-Zomi ethnic affiliation.

1.3.1: A brief over view of problems faced by Hill Tribes of Manipur

Akin to the instances faced by the tribal people across the country at various epochs in the history of the country hitherto, the Hill Tribes of Manipur are tossed with the same problem thereby hindering their freedom and age old ownership of land. The authority of land ownership has been the central tenet in determining the distinctiveness of the tribal people. The authority over land has an inextricable linkage to the traditional system of chieftainship institution and this institution has beenthe only institution which administered and governed the tribal people especially the non-Nagas. This age old traditional system has been witnessed by the British who appreciated it and safeguarded its power and existence.

With the departure of the British and the takeover of administration by the Manipur kingdom, which later became an Indian state,the administration and governance of the Hills fell into the jurisdiction of Manipur. Since then, the government of Manipur has executed several laws and regulations such as Land Reform Laws, Village Authority Acts and Acquisition of Chiefs Rights to take control over the administration of tribal lands which are protected under the chief. Attempts have also been made to abolish the chieftainship institution. Amides all these, privatisation of land from a communitarian land have been extensively taking place among the tribal population which inevitably challenges the very existence and meaning of a tribe. Therefore, the condition and situation under which the Hill Tribes of Manipur are currently locked into is of grave uncertainty in the lines of sustainability and survival.

1.4: Problem area Defined

Churachandpur, the second largest town of Manipur with a population of 2,71,274, is inhabited by a cluster of communities and tribes. Surrounded by hill’s, a larger section of the tribal population, which constitute about 33 recognized tribes, reside in the hilly villages. The Paites are one such tribe with a population size of 49,271 as per the 2001 census which follows the community land ownership pattern. Clubbed under CHIKIMZ, the Paites are again a combination of different clans who are mainly concentrated in the plains and hills of Churachandpur District. The Paites have a system of community land ownership governed by unwritten custom and tradition. Under this system, every individual is entitled equal opportunity to own, utilize and cultivate for his/her means of survival. This system is under the administration of the chief who holds the ultimate power in deciding every matter related to social, economic and political issues. However, with the change in time and society, this land ownership pattern has been gradually diluted with private ownership. The emergence of local contractors and bureaucrats with huge financial and political powers has led to the privatization of huge chunks of land. This emerging phenomenon is likely to have a huge impact on the social structure of the Paite community implying a vertical form of stratification ranging from top to bottom.

Like many other tribal population in the hills of the state the Paites are also experiencing land alienation, pressure on traditional livelihood due to factors like land policy implication, urbanization and exposure to outside non-traditional world, education and migration etc. The system of autonomy and self-dependence has been slowly getting defunct with the influence of with private ownership where village lands are being leased out to private hands. Such indirect state-sponsored land alienation among the tribal people has the maximum possibility of negative effect on traditional tribal societies. So, it is indeed an issue and a threat to the basic cultural values of the Paite community which is yet to be realised and addressed. Hence, it is extremely important to conduct a systematic study to find out the nature and extent of land alienation and its impact among the selected tribal group.

The Paites:

The Paites are one of the constituting tribes of the Zomi who inhabit Burma, India and Bangladesh. The word Paite means “a group of people marching” or ‘Walkers’ in a word,”Pai-walk”te” – “people”. The Paites are a recognised scheduled tribe in Manipur as well as in Mizoram. The Paites concentrated in Manipur, a north-eastern state of India. The Paite tribe constitutes the fifth largest tribe in Manipur, out of the 33 tribes recognised as Scheduled Tribes by the Government of India. In 1956, under the list of tribes recognised and scheduled by the Government of India in Manipur, the tribes who were recorded by the Government as ‘Paite’ petitioned to be known and recorded according to their own distinct tribe name, which was granted to them, so in all 33 tribes, with their distinct tribe names, came to be recognized by the Government of India.

The Paites are communities belonging to the Northern Chin sub-group of the Kuki-Chin conger of people whose initial process of identity formation is geographically associated with Chin state of Burma. It is believed that their ancestors have migrated there through stages from south west china. The core of the Paite Ethnic entity is also known as ‘Tedim Chin’ after the geographical area of the same name in chin state. The Chin people or the Zoumi literally meaning people of the hills concentrate in the chin state of Burma, Mizoram and Manipur mainly. According to the local tradition, the Chin people originated from a ‘Pit’ somewhere in Central China. The cave or pit is called ‘khul’ in Paite which literally means a grave or a hole. The Paite speaking people come from the Guite and Sukte clans and they claim their originfromChmnuai. The Paite mostly does not recognise the name Chin but recognise themselves Yo or Zo (Zou) in the north Lai in the Centre and Sho in the south besides many other names. These terms are used synonymous to the word Chin by the speakers. In another words, Chin is said to be derived from the Chinese word Jen meaning Men.

Paite is the term used by the people on the Indian side of Indo-Burma border. The meaning of the word is currently interpreted as to denote their migratory habit. It literally means ‘People on the move’. The terms “Tedim chin” came in vogue sometimes. The term Paite or PaitheinLushai version was given by ThrnHualngo and Lushai people with a slantingly derogatory sense to designate these Tedim chin people as they apply to the term Pawi to the Haks and Falam Chins. Lushai tribes were in the habit of giving names to ethno-cultural groups according to their choice. The term was used to include all the Paite (non- ‘r’ group) speaking population living between the Lushai and Falam chins. For a long time, Paite was not accepted as a group identity of India by the people themselves except in the Lushai areas. Till the attainment of India’s independence and separation of India from Burma, the people opted to be known by the clan names of their political lords. The different clans under the Guite chieftainship were invariably known as the Vuite or Guite or Paite and Sukte.

Paite pronounced as Paihte is a term used in India whereasTedim chin is used in Burma for the same people after independence from the British. The same people happen to be known by two different names in two countries now. A member of a group is a Paite so long as he or she is within the Indian Territory and he or she is again Tedim chin one within Burma so we can say that Paite implies Indian citizenship and Tedim Chin implies Burmese citizenship. The term Paite or Paihte is not acceptably popular in Burman as the term Tedim Chin is also not popularly acceptable in Indian side by the people for whom it was meant. As the name paihte was given by the R Group of Chin people like Lushai, Hualngo, Pawi, the term was initially accepted by the Paite in Lushai areas only. It takes time to get accepted in areas outside Lushai influence. In Manipur also, the term Paite did not get popular acceptance among the Paites themselves initially while they were identifying themselves within the clan of their political overlords. Similarly, the term chin became more popular in the areas of Burmese influence. Hence Tedim Chin in Burma and Paite in India cropped up as names of the same community.

Thought the term Paite has been in use for a long time, as mentioned above, the official acceptance took place only in 1948 in Manipur prior to the formation of the Paite National Council. The official adoption of the name and its organisation was necessitated by a heavy pressure to include the Paite people under the Kuki of Mizo(Lusai) in India. The Paite as a whole can be Mizo or Chin or Kuki according to the group feeling and interaction. Some of the Paite now in Mizoram are Mizo just the way the Paite in Chin are Chin. The Paite of Burma thinks that they are neither Mizo nor Kuki. The Paites of Manipur does not want to be labelled as Kuki partly because there is no Paite speaker in the Kuki group and for some other reasons as mentioned above. The Paite feel that the Thadou are Kuki proper and not them. They also feel that they are not politically Mizo under different political umbrella though the political meaning of Mizo is applicable to them ethnologically and topologically.

The social orientation of the Paite community is egalitarian and horizontally structured empowering equal rights and dignity to each members of its community. The society is governed by its chief who is the ultimate authority and is considered the lord of the land. However, as the society is patriarchal, one would seldom find women holding the chieftainship. The system of governance is somehow related to as a semi-feudal structural form of governance. Among the Paites, some difference exists in land relation and ownership. A sort of semi-feudal system of ownership of land and forest prevails among. Among them the chiefs called ‘Haosa/Hausa’ are the masters of the land and the villagers are tenants. There is a well-developed system of grain rent collection called tangsen, bushan(Buhsan), changsen or fathang. Furthermore, the Chief exacts labour from the cultivator families, often at the rate of four days per person per annum. The Paite families are far more at the mercy of their Chief, who mostly are good chiefs but often tends to be autocratic and arbitrary in some cases. The chief can decide who will have land for cultivation and to stay in the village. However, in doing so even he is bound to take the village elders into confidence.

The Paite communities as Hill tribes have been nature worshippers who used to worship nature and spirits until the advent of the British Missionaries’ who later converted them into Christians. Almost all the Paite communities soon converted into Christianity and the majority of the remaining per cent joined in the later stages.

The family council locally known as Inndongta is the institution which is unique to the Paite community. It is a council formed by the combination of blood relatives and trusted friends who are designated to stand and take charge in place of the family in times of happiness and grief. The council takes the responsibility of organising everything as the family may be emotionally unstable or either too busy for organising and taking crucial decisions in times of happiness and grief. So the family council is very important institution of the Paite community which has been practised since long back.

The land and the people under study:

Churachandpur, the second largest town of Manipur with a population of 2,71,274, is inhabited by a cluster of communities and tribes. Surrounded by hill’s, a larger section of the tribal population, which constitute about 33 recognized tribes, reside in the hilly villages. The Paites are one such tribe with a population size of 49,271 as per the 2001 census which follows the community land ownership pattern. Clubbed under CHIKIMZ, the Paites are again a combination of different clans who are mainly concentrated in the plains and hills of Churachandpur District. The Paites have a system of community land ownership governed by unwritten custom and tradition. Under this system, every individual is entitled equal opportunity to own, utilize and cultivate for his/her means of survival. This system is under the administration of the chief who holds the ultimate power in deciding every matter related to social, economic and political issues.

However, with the change in time and society, this land ownership pattern has been gradually diluted with private ownership. The emergence of local contractors and bureaucrats with huge financial and political powers has led to the privatization of huge chunks of land. This emerging phenomenon is likely to have a huge impact on the social structure of the Paite community implying a vertical form of stratification ranging from top to bottom.

2.2 Chieftainship Institution

Land holding system in a plural society (a mixture of different communities) is bound to change. Olden days and present days cannot be the same. Land holding system among the Paite is based on Chiefs/Headman and Khulakpah among the Nagas. The Nagas elect their Khulakpah which remains unchanged as long as he is good (liked by the people). But among the Paite, it is hereditary and unchangeable. So the wellbeing of a village largely relied on the chief. If the chief is good, the villagers will enjoy and if the chief is bad, the villagers will suffer. As it is hereditary, the chief passes on his chieftainship to his son. Though the father might have been a good chief, it is not guaranteed that the son will be good. This is the vulnerability of the chieftainship system in our community. The chief is the Lord of the Soil. So the land is up to the chief. But among the Paites, chieftainship is dependent upon two categories, (1)Democratic Chief (2) Despotic Chief/Hereditary. Some people belief that that democratic electoral system is prevalent only among the Nagas but that is wrong, even among the Paites, there are some few clans who have practised this system such as the democratic system such as the Falam clans. The chief has a council (Hausa Upa) which is formed by his selection. In a democratic chief system, such council members are elected by the people and not by the chief. For instance, the Taisonclans among the Paite also follow the democratic system of chieftainship. However, this practice has been prevalent mostly among the smaller clans for which it hasn’t been well known among the majority community.

One might wonder why chiefs are privileged with so much authority and power, it is because he is the lord of the soil, and he is presumed to be the owner of everything within his territory, that is why people give Buhsun/Tangseu (paddy tax) or Saliang(one leg of wild animal to be paid by the hunter). This was considered as a Tenure which people owed to the chief. The villagers therefore owe allegiance to the chief. The chief is also ultimately responsible for everything, even in times of illnesses, the curse is the responsibility of the chief at the same time, it is also his responsibility to contribute the sacrifices required to heal such illnesses. There are countless customary lineage which shows how the chiefs have been given extra respect and privileges. At the same time, along with this privilege, they are also bound with certain responsibilities’ as a chief such as in times of epidemics, it is the duty of the chief to offer sacrifices to the deities; or in times of war, the chief is supposed to lead the army and so on. It is due to such circumstances that a chief is also considered as the Lord of The Soil and these are the main reasons why the people owe such allegiance and pay such respect and taxes to the chief.

However, there are also some chiefs who are bad and cruel to the people, in such situation, the only option the people have is to migrate to another village, so to stop this process of defection, some chiefs have started a process of detention called Inkhak/Loukhak where the villagers are tied up from the authority to sell their land and houses. They also put a mark in their Granaries (Buh Pang) and tell them that they cannot take anything below the mark if they leave the village. Such privileges of confiscating people’s property were practised among the larger clans like the Sukte, Haokip, Guite and not all chefs practised such acts. Some might even loot the property of the villagers in the village border as an act of the chief. On the other hand some chiefs have no issue with such migrations, they presume that they must be willing to live closer to their relatives or for better livelihood options for which they let them migrate peacefully.

Under a chief, it is customary practice; a cultural law and a traditional practice that every individual as a humanbeing has unrestricted access to land for his livelihood. This pattern has been practiced since times immemorial. But today, if we look at our current scenario of Churachandpur town, we can see that it has become impossible to practice such systems of equal access to land and resources. This is because land has become privatised and each and every piece of land is now privately owned by an individual, co-operative, organisation or a society. So no land is available for free, but rather, every piece of land is being surveyed and recorded in the land record book of the government and everyone has to buy it in order to own it.

It is indeed confusing how a tribal land which was so well preserved under the chieftainship system could become a private land which is registered under the land records of the government. This process of privatisation started with the coming of the MLR&LR act way back in 1962 which was implemented in 89 villages. So, regardless of customs and traditions, today, an individual can sell his piece of land in whatever price he wants and the ownership and transfer of land is being legally recognised through the Legal Document called PuccaPatta (JamaMandi) which is not exactly a PuccaPatta as it is not printed in a Judicial Stamp and so on, but it certainly recognises that so and so is the certified owner of this land.

This change in the pattern of ownership of land indeed has affected the customs and traditions of tribal people as Custom contains a set of characteristics such as culture and property. Property again includes (i) Moveable property and (ii) Immovable property. So, land being an immovable property, the change in the pattern of land systems directly affects the tribal cultural system aswell. That is why even though our historical tradition has practised and promoted by our great grandfathers has given a system where each and every individual has an entitlement to access land and its resources, such practices are now cornered due to the implementation of the governments land regulation policy such as the MLR&LR Act 1962. This act has brought in new laws in exchange of the traditional customary practices of land relations in the Paite community.

Before the commencement of this law (pre 1962), people simply went to the chief and asked for the land they needed and as per the allotment of the chief, the land became their property which was authorised on a mutual basis of understanding. There was no need of paper document or any sort of monetary transaction, every individual respected such properties and the entitlement given by the chief was last and final. Such was the nature of the land system of the Paites, governed by unwritten laws and customary laws. But today, the status of that same chief, who was considered as the lord of the soil and had all the authority to give and take land is no longer the same because every individual is claiming ownership of their respective lands under the MLR&LR Act. So, in this process, the power and status of the Chief is destroyed.

2.2.1: Selling of Chieftainship

When a chief sells out his land, he is ultimately selling off his chieftainship aswell, because, his chieftainship is determined by his land, without which, he would be a lion without its teeth, or a king without a kingdom. When a chief sells off his land, he is proving that he is not the ultimate and permanent owner of the land and therefore, the government appreciates it as the land is indirectly within its reach through the land records. On the other hand, a chief sells off his land because he feels that he has the legal right to do so as the land is his property. But, in the real sense, he cannot, because Chieftainship institution is hereditary. Often, there have been cases when the chief sold away his chieftainship to another individual. But, as chieftainship is hereditary, when the rightful successors of the chief makes a claim that they are legally entitled to overtake the chieftainship, they stand on a legally and ethically stronger ground, for which, they usually win the case even if it is a court case. This is possible because the concept of hereditary in this context does not end with family or blood lines, it extends up to clan based hereditary system. So , if the chief is about to sell his chieftainship to a tribal individual belonging to another clan, another individual who belongs to the same clan as the chief can object and claim that the genealogy itself is wrong based on ethical grounds.

Instances can be drawn from the problem that occurred when the Thanlon (Churachandpur District) village chief who belonged to a Simte community sold his chieftainship to a person from his own Clan but belonged to the Paite community. Months later after the payment, the relatives of the original chief could not accept it so they filed a case which went on for a while, but on the ground of tribal customary laws and traditional customs, the case was won and the chiefship was given back to the original clan members.

Another example can be drawn from the story of the Lungchin chief who mortgaged his land to a money lander. But when the chief tried to claim his land back, the money lander totally refused to return the land under any cost. However, based on customary grounds, though the chief could not retrieve his land back, his relatives claimed the land though on a price much higher than the amount taken at the time of mortgaging.

2.2.2: Chief system v/s Khulakpah system:

The status of the Paite under chieftainship has been perceived to be a draw back or as a threat for future prosperity, because, the survival and sustenance of the land and the people are highly dependent on the chief who could be a good chief, a bad chief, smart or ignorant. The problem was that they cannot be changed or overthrown in cases when they are bad or cruel. Therefore, administration under a chief is seen to be too much at stake. Under such circumstances, the khulakpa system of the Nagas has been viewed as a plausible alternative of administration which can be a more participatory and sustainable form of governance rather than the chieftainship system. But, the fact is that, such ideas are generated because people are not totally aware about the value of chieftainship. Chieftainship is a great institution. Even the Britishwere stunned and impressed with the chieftainship institution.They appreciated it because it was very similar with the system of governance under a queen. It also has a lot of similarity with Greek City state during the first century AD.

Transition of Political Economy

4.1: The initial Acts recognising Chieftainship

Chieftainship as an institution has existed before the emergence of the British and has remained the same even in the post British period. The Kuki Rebellion (Zogal-as recorded in the London Library) was fought by the ZO (Zou Tribes: administratively termed Kuki) against the British in 1917-19 which means that the tribes’ in Manipur fought against the British Colonial rule. It is also important to remember that they never surrendered under the British. Till then, the tribal domains were never a colony of the British. Later towards the end of the 2 nd world war 1941-2, an agreement called the ‘Stand Still Agreement’ was passed. Later in 1947 when India got independence, more than 500 chiefs across different parts of the country submitted to be a part of India, the tribal people never tried to give in to be a part of India. But when boundaries between Burma and India were drawn, the separation between East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and West Pakistan somehow brought this region within India. Disturbed by the Second World War, the British had to leave without being able to determine a proper system of administration for the tribes. But, even when they were about to leave, they clearly mentioned to the raja of Manipur that these tribal people should have a proper and separate administration, which the Raja hesitated in the beginning but agreed upon it. Later in 1949 October 15, the Merger Agreement was signed by the Raja of Manipur which took Manipur as a Princely State under the Union of India. This day has ever since been observed as The Black Day of Manipur to represent the sad ending of Manipur Kingdom (Sanga R).

Upon the signing of the Merger Agreement, the Raja of Manipur received a monetary compensation of Rs.3,00,000 per Annum. Not a single penny of this compensatory money has been shared with any of the chiefs of the hills who had equal status and authority as the king. This was because none of the Hills were a part of Manipur and neither were they in India. They were totally separate and independent known as the Hill Independent Country under the West Bengal Regulation 1738 which was drafted by the British to give a separate administrative system for the hills including Assam and the Chittagong tracks. But the hill tribes were far too ignorant to adhere to those regulations as a system of their safeguard and administration. That is why the hills automatically came under the administration of Manipur and hence, became a part of India though there is no document or agreement recognising how and when the hills became a part of Manipur.

With the coming of the British, there have been some changes in the pattern of chieftainship. The British introduced the English pattern of hereditary where the right to overtake the father’s property is awarded to the eldest son, before which, the youngest was often offered in our community especially among the Mozo/Lushai and the Hmar people. Most of the Lushai people and even within the Zomi’s, the Sukte,Suanteetc practice this culture of offering the right to inheritance to the youngest son in the family. The British changed this practice and changed this practice in their British way thereby offering the inheritance rights to the eldest son. So,firstly, the British introduced the eldest hereditary system. Second, they introduced the boundary protocol which never existed in our tribal society. There was no concept of boundary and everything was based on mutual understandings. So no one fought on the matter of a boundary, neither the other tribes nor the mainland people (Meitei) or the Burmese. It was a no men’s land. But there was no permanent settlement in a particular area, they kept on shifting depending of the easy availability of food, security and survival until they finally settle in a well-populated village such as Chiimnuai, Geltui, Saizang, Tedim, Mualpi, and Lamzang which are villages which have existed for hundreds of years and are considered the greatest cities of those times. This pattern of ancient village cities can be found among different tribes who had their own cities where there was a large population concentrating in the village. One such example could be the KhuangnungVanglai for the Simtes as well. They were all independent in their own villages. But the British appeared before these cites reached their zenith. The coming of the British has brought some changes in the system of chieftainship

It is a general conception that the British has allotted the Chieftainship Patta (Legal Chieftainship Document) to the Chiefs of the hills. But it is not so. The paper given by the British was not exactly a Patta but recognition of their Chieftainship and as a proclamation to the whole world that they are indigenous people and so and so are the Lord of the Soil and the owner of this land. So, whatever people’s perception about chieftainship may be, it is the sole reason why the hill areas are safe till today. It is because of the existence of these chiefs that even the government of India cannot touch these tribal lands as they want.

The Chin Hills Regulation Act 1896 has been used in the Chiin Hills, Mizo Hills, Manipur and timely extended to Nagaland and Meghalaya which is affective till today. There were also other Acts like the Assam Jhuming Act, Village Authority act 1956, Manipur Hill People Representation act 1947. In 1935, Government of India act 1935 with effective from 1937 regulated all the constitutional mandates related to tribal land. In 1960, MLR&LR Act was planned for the plain areas of Manipur only, due to the ignorance and sheer-mindedness of the tribes, without any knowledge about its future implications and its political policy, in the 60s and 61, people started wanting to register their houses and the land (Periodic Patta PP). Thereafter, the MLR&LR act was immediately extended to the Churachandpur extending till Zezaw. To extend this act in Churachandpur, the consent of the chiefs in these respective areas was required, however, negotiated with enticing Government jobs, the chiefs who never the less saw not far enough easily fell into the prey of the governments appeal. Moreover, the people in this area also felt that instead of constantly dealing with the chiefs for every matter related to land, it would be easier if land could be owned into private hands. This is the beginning of selling land. Though lease system was practised a few areas, this system was not realised by the Paite land owners. So land was sold out everywhere even for government offices or for the armies camp. Lands were permanently sold out which would never go back to the owner unless it was bought. Had it been the lease system, the land could have been leased out for the period of time required in a negotiated price which would go back to the owner once the timeline ends.

Instances can be drawn from the dispute over land between the STC (Subsidiary Training Centre) of the BSF (Border Security Forces) and the Pearson Village community. The STC in Churachandpur, Mualkoi Village was established in 1993 covering a land mass of 336 Acres. The land was given by the chiefs of Tangnuam, Tingkangphai, Pearson, Suongpi and Gangpimual Village Chiefs as a gift to the BSF. Though the land was awarded as a gift, there was no proper demarcation of exact boundaries which led to a dispute over the area of land gifted. Therefore, after some time, the BSF claimed that the cemetery of the Pearson village also belonged to them which, under any circumstances, were unacceptable to the villagers. This issue created a huge conflict between the BSF and the villagers of Pearson. As the land was gifted, the BSF could boldly claim what belonged to them. Had the land been leased out, the issue might have taken a different toll.

.2: Post Independence India and Manipur: Status of Hill Tribes

4.2.1: Legal and Constitutional Aspects

To a vast number of the tribal people, the forest is their well-loved home, their livelihood, and their very existence. It gives them food- fruits of all kinds, edible leaves, honey, nourishing roots, wild game and fish. It provides them with material to build their homes and to practice their arts. By exploiting its products they can supplement their meagre income. It keeps them warm with its fuel and cool with its grateful shade. Their religion leads them to believe that there are many spirits living in the trees. There are special sacrifices to the forest gods; in many places offerings are made to a tree before it is cut, and there are usually ceremonies before and after hunting (Elwin 1963).

Such was the kind of autonomy and self-sufficiency in tribal areas even among the hill tribes of Manipur. During the pre-British period, the only judicial and institutional body of governance being the chieftainship institution, tribal people or synonymously the hill tribes lived peacefully without any formal/written legal constitutions and geographical boundaries. The turning point of this historical epoch can be traced with the emergence of the British who introduced along with Christianity, the concept of administration and demarcated boundaries. During the British period, these hill tracts were administered under the President of the Manipur Durbar who was a British ICS officer. The Hill areas of Manipur were at that time administered separately under the Manipur State Hill People (Administration) Regulation, 1947. This clearly signifies that the hill areas were at no point of time under the administration of the Raja of Manipur. The Raja of Manipur claimed absolute ownership of all lands within his territory which was limited within the valley areas within which he collected revenue but not from the hills. Rather, the hill people were administered in tune with their age old customs and traditional practices under the British.

In 1947 august 14, it has been said that the Meitei King took over the administration of the hills from the British. But, if such was the case, under such authority and independence granted to the tribes by the British themselves, it was a responsibility on the part of Manipur state to inform and take the consent of the tribes and make proclamation on behalf of the British. But the fact was that the British only suggested that the tribes should govern themselves. All such documental proofs were being hidden away by the Meiteis. The constitution of Manipur was first drafted in 1947, in this draft, the tribes added a clause stating that the tribals will join the union of Manipur and be a part of India, but, if they wish to do so, they can leave after five years. This clause was added to the first draft of the constitution of Manipur, but it was removed by the Meitei people in the second draft and the tribes could not negotiate to put it back again.

The Naga leader Phizo and the Assam governor Akbar Haidari in 1947 signed a 9 point agreement in which it was included in the 9 th point that the Chin Hills Regulation Act has to be continued. The clause further stated that the Nagas will pay tenure to the Assam (which is synonymous to paying to India) for ten years after which the Nagas can take their own decision. But this interpretation of the exact meaning has been debated on what its intention really meant and with the departure of Akbar Haidari, the nine point agreement failed at that point.

In Mizoram, All Lushai Chiefs Conference was called by the Mizoram chief superintendent where they drafted a memorandum which stated that they will be a part of India for ten years after which they will make their own decision. In the Chiin Hills, the constitution of Burma as already drafted in 1947 and they got independence in 1948. Chapter 10 of the constitution is the Law of secession which stated that if the tribals residing in the states of Burma such as the Kachin state, Karen state, Shan State, Chiin state etc are willing to go out of Burma, they should make a referendum which will be presented in the assembly where if 2/3 of the members vote for it, the resolution will be sent to the president of Burma which would be the end of it. This was very simple and easy. But things changed when the planned federal government turned out to be overtaken by the military coup.

In the context of Manipur, a remarkable initiative was initiated in 1947 under the leadership of Mr.Zavum, who belonged from a Thadou community, to determine the future of the tribals as India was getting independence from the British. So a meeting of all the Hill tribes was called at Imphal and indeed representatives from all tribes came together. The agenda was to determine what the future of the tribals is going to be. But some Thadou fundamentalist hard cores invoked the idea of using Proper Kuki Thadou language for recording the proceedings of the meeting. This proposition stirred up the other tribes and led to a point of argument which dispersed the members and neither the agenda nor the meeting could take place. The politics behind this argument was that the Thadous’ used to claim that Thadou is the proper Kuki language and the other languages are meaningless (locally termed as Seki-Makhai). This incident was also heated by the statement made by William Shaw in his book called Short Notes on Thadou Kuki which said that inferior tribes like Khothang, Lunkim, Vaiphei,Gangte comes under the wings of Thadou-Kukis. This statement annoyed the minority tribes. This was the reason why the meeting in 1947 could not take place when Thadou as a language was proposed to be used for recording all the proceedings of the meeting. The outcome of this argument is the formation of Khul Union in which all the tribes who did not want to be called Kuki joined the union (Neihsial T).

In 1947, the Manipur Hill Representation Act was drafted which determined the administration of the Manipur hill tribals. The introduction of the British rule in Manipur is called the British Paramount Sea 1826-1892 where the British Political Agents administered the process of governance extending till 1947. During this period, different British political agents came and administered the hills. In 1892 (after the 1891 Palace Revolution) the British gave Raja Churachand (who was still a minor) the authority to rule which was the beginning of Manipur Durbar in which the president was the King of Manipur which extended till 1947. During this period of Manipur Darbar, British officials from Assam used to come to inspect the Manipur administration. Their comment was that during this period of Manipur Darbar, not a single tribal has been a member of the Darbar from 1892-1947. During this period of Darbar, the British officials did not keep finance and Hills under their administration and left the rest to the Darbar. So the Darbar administration was tied up in finance and administration of the hills from the Meitei king. The king asked the British to give the administration to him or at least to his son. But the response given by the British was ‘you are unfit to rule the Hill people’ (Neihsial T)

The Manipur Hills Regulation Act was repealed in 1956 when the Manipur village authority act was established. But the Village Authority Act was very weak and powerless plus it had no financial power being sanctioned a financial power of only Rs.500. It also demanded that all the proceedings of the administration process should be recorded in Manipuri which is totally impossible for the hill people especially in villages who never had the chance to learn or speak such alien language to them. So the village authority act 1956 act was very bad. But still, it was the only legal constitution which protects the tribals from their freedom so they were compelled to use it regardless of their contentment upon it.

4.2.2: Merger agreement

After the partition of India, all the princely states acceded to merge with India and Pakistan. Accordingly, Manipur Merged into the union of India by signing a document called The Manipur Merger Agreement on 21 st September 1949 at Shillong between V.P.Menon who was the then adviser of the government of India, Ministry of States and the Maharaja of Manipur Shri (L) Bodha Chandra Singh. A Merger Function was held on 15 th October 1949 at Imphal Polo ground where the Maharaja took the salute and surrendered his territory, titles, authority, rights and privileges except his personal properties and religious rites and received and annual compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs per annum. The total area of Manipur merger agreement covered a total land area of 700 square miles or 26,500 hectares which does not include even a single inch of hill areas and neither the tribal chiefs were asked to sign the agreement nor they were shared the compensation as they were a separate entity. (Sanga R)

4.2.3: Attempts to govern the hills

With the passage of time, several Acts, Rules and Regulations which have taken over the administrative systems of the tribal people and posed treat to seize control over the tribal lands. Such acts are,

1. The Manipur Village Authority Act, 1956
2. The Manipur Hill Area (Acquisition of Chiefs Rights) Act, 1967
3. The Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reform Act, 1960

4.2.4: Decentralised system of Governance

The process of decentralisation in the system of governance in Manipur started with the introduction of the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the rural areas of the valley districts Imphal East, Imphal West, Thoubal and Bishnupur. Similarly, in the hill areas, local bodies were elected in the form of Village Authority and the District Council. The village authority was established under the Manipur Village Authority (Hill Areas) Act, 1956 as a local body of self-governance which was implemented in 1957. The act introduced the controversial provision of elections among the Hill Tribes. The members of the village authority were elected on the basis of adult franchise which earlier used to be nominated by the Chief. The act also placed further limitations on the powers of the chiefs. Before the act was introduced, the chief along with the village authority functioned as the village court, however, under the act, the head of the state was authorised to appoint two or more members of the village authority to function as the court. Moreover, if the chiefs were not members of the court, he is not entitled to preside over it and the chairperson of the court will no longer be the Chief but shall be selected from the members thereafter.

The introduction of the village authority act has therefore hindered the traditional system of chieftainship as a system of administration and governance among the tribal people. The status of a chief is indispensable in a tribal community. He is the ultimate power and the lord of the soil. But the democratisation and decentralisation of governance in the hills did not only hamper the traditional system of self-governance but also has greatly brought down the value and status of the Chief. Chieftainship as an institution is central in the tribal custom and the introduction of the village authority act has ultimately decentralised nothing else but the inalienable power of the chief.

4.2.5: The Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reform Act, 1960

The MLR&LR Act 1960 was enacted by the parliament of India to consolidate and amend the land revenue system of Manipur and at the same time bring certain form of land reform. Before the enactment of the state land laws, the Assam Land Revenue Regulation Act 1886 was applied to Manipur by the State Durbar Resolution.

The ultimate intention of the MLR&LR act is to bring uniformity in distribution of land throughout the state regardless of the wide range of differences in the culture and customs of tradition. However, section 2 of the act says that, “It extends to the whole of the state of Manipur except the hill areas thereof”. Thus the act did not apply to the hill areas. However, under the act, the term Hill Districts has been subjectivised to a special meaning under section 2(1) of the Act which says hill areas are those areas in the hill tracts of the state of Manipur as the state government by notification in the official gazette declared it to be hill areas. This implies that the official gazette is authorised to define if a hill is plain or a plain is a hill. The state government under different notifications had notified 1161 villages as hill areas in the 5 hill districts of Manipur. Therefore, so far, 89 villages of Churachandpur District have been covered by the act. On 1 st March 1962, all the provisions of Chapters I to VIII, XII and XIII and sections 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 125, 126, 132 and 133 of Chapter X of the MLR&LR Act 1960 had been put to force in the whole of the area comprised in the following villages of Churachandpur District Sub-Division and all such areas, which lie contiguous to and between two or more of the said villages.

The list of villages surveyed and covered under the MLR&LR Act 1960 in Churachandpur District, Churachandpur Sub-Division as per government records are listed below:

Table 4.1

Note: This list has been issued under the Official Notification, orders by the Chief Commissioner at Imphal on 22 nd Feb., 1962 under the designation of G.H.Singh, Secretary (R&M), Manipur Administration.

The act however has mentioned special provisions regarding schedule tribes that tribal lands are protected against the exploitation of the majority plain people. They are not allowed to own immovable properties and settle down permanently. The Manipur government has been willing to do away with this restriction and obtain immovable properties and facilitate non-tribals to settle down permanently. Under Section 158, the special provisions regarding Scheduled Tribes clearly mentions that no transfer of land by a person who is a member of the Scheduled Tribes shall be valid unless-

• The transfer is to another member of the scheduled tribes; or
• Where the transfer is to a person who is not a member of any such tribe, it is made with the previous permission in writing of the deputy commissioner; or
• The transfer is by way of mortgage to a co-operative society.

The fact remains that there is no constitutional protection for the tribals other than Article 371-C which provides the constitution of a Hill Area Committee (HAC) to look after the special interest of the tribes of Manipur. Despite certain inefficacies, the state government has further tried to meddle with the independent functioning of the HAC by proposing the addition of the State Election Commission in the decision making process.

The Department of Information and Public Relation, Government of India, on the other hand has campaigned for the Importance of survey and preparation of land Records & extension of the provision of M.L.R. & L.R Act, 1960 to Hill areas. The rationality of the campaign stated that,

“the primary objective of the Revenue Laws is for the preparation of the records of rights in respect of land in occupation and enjoyment of the citizens. Survey and settlement is a necessary precondition in the preparation of the records of rights. When the records of rights are prepared, the rights of individuals over land shall be defined and recorded. The copies of the records of rights shall be documents of title and may be tendered as security in transactions with Banks. There is, therefore, more advantage to be gained by extension of M.L.R.& L.R Act in the Hill areas”.

The statement has further clarified that 16,936 (Sixteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-six) hectares of land in the Districts of Senapati, Churachandpur, Tamenglong and Chandel have been surveyed and recorded under the MLR&LR Act 1960 during the period from 1960-84. It also further stated that another area of 7,797 (Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-seven) Hectares of land has been surveyed in the districts of Ukhrul, Senapati, Churachandpur, Chandel and Tamenglong with the consent of the Village Authorities/Headmen without the extension of the provisions of MLR&LR Act 1960, but still, extension of the provisions of the said Act is still required for the preparation of land records under the Law.

Section 1 of the MLR&LR Act 1960 which relates to the extension of provisions of the Act in any area in the State runs as under:-

(i) This Act may be called the Manipur Land revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960.

(ii) It extends to the whole of the Union Territory of Manipur except the Hill areas thereof.

(iii) It shall come into force on such date the Administrator may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different areas and for different provisions of this Act.

The provisions of sub-section (ii) and (iii) of section 1 of the Act clearly states that the power is vested in the Administrator of the State to extend the act to Hill areas which is clearly a threat to the Hill Tribes who identifies themselves as a separate entity with distinct culture and tradition. The traditional systems of governance and customs which has provided equal rights and entitlements to each and every individual to access and acquire Land as per their requirement and necessity has been put at stake by the provisions of the MLR&LR Act 1960 which has empowered the state government to declare and extend the Act to any part of the state just by a mere notification of the Administrators and the Official Gazette. This is equivalent to claiming the right to alter the history and future of the Hill Tribes and mingle with their age old culture and tradition. At large, the very means of existence and sustainability of the tribes will immediately be curbed as the authority to buy and sell lands will open up ample opportunities to the mainland non-tribals who are with better economic conditions, whereas the tribals whose traditional way of living has been closely linked to nature and its resources as a means of livelihood will be suppressed by the sudden need of money as a value for exchange and survival. Therefore, the very characteristic of a tribe, which is inevitably linked to land, will easily become alienable and the ultimate outcome being the formation of a landless tribal community, which is rather harsh and unacceptable.

The tenacious act of the government does not end here. To further make the implementation of the said act smoother, the state government wanted to remove the words ‘except the hill areas thereof’ in sub-section (2) of section 1 of the Act and also the “provisio” thereof on the ‘simple’ ground that the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 1 can be suitably applied for extension of the act to any area including hill areas. The excuse framed to substantiate the rationality of extending the act to hill areas was that even the states of Meghalaya and Mizoram has their own Land Laws, but the fact is that these states have also acquired 6 th Schedule and under certain provisions, their lands are safe within themselves, so it is alright for them to have such land laws. But the case with Manipur Tribals is a different story as they are neither under the 5 th Schedule or 6 th Schedule of the Constitution of India but administered slyly as an Autonomous Council but really has no autonomous character being deprived of Budgets and Funds directly from central government. The only form of funding received by the Autonomous Council is through the state government which comes in the form of Grant in Aid which already makes the Autonomous Council a subject of the State.

The government of Manipur has further tried to persuade the hill tribes by stating that, ‘there is no ground for fear of alienation of private lands belonging to tribals…….the governments only intention is to improve the existing system so that more facilities may be made available specially for development through improvement of the system’. The intricacy of the situation however remains far beyond improving systems but rather is a heinous process of diluting the tribal population. One such example can be driven out of Section 158 of the MLR&LR Act 1960 which is actually a protective clause for the protection of the rights and interest of the tribal people on their private lands. “153. Special provision regarding schedule tribes. No transfer of land by a person who is a member of Schedule Tribe shall be valid unless-

• The transfer is to another member of the Schedule Tribes; or
• Where the transfer is to a person who is not a member of any such tribe, it is made with the previous permission in writing of the Deputy Commissioner, provided that the Deputy Commissioner shall not give the permission unless he has first secured the consent thereto of the District Council within whose jurisdiction the land lies; or
• The transfer is by way of mortgage to a co-operative society.

Despite these safeguards and protections, non tribals have successfully found ways to infiltrate the licence to legalise their ownership of land and territory within tribal areas like Churachandpur which have been covered under the MLR&LR Act 1960 and is obviously entitled under this so called protection. But the fact is that there are even colonies of non-tribal communities today in Churachandpur. Some prominent localities of the Meitei (Non-Tribal) community for instance can be recalled in Khumujamba, ThangaLeirak, ZoVeng, Ngathal, Phailian, Yaiphakol Village etc where the places itself have been called Meitei Leikai (Locality) and no tribal person would want to live in those areas. The historical evolution of these localities are a tragedy for the tribal communities which took place over the years and having become a fortified ground for the shadily illegal encroacher which the tribals have taken too long to realise the damage and threat it had posed. The incubation of this encroachment, as stated by a local MDC, took place under the Good Samaritan concept of Co-operative society which opened a way for non-tribals to gain access to tribal land through the introduction of Piggery, Horticulture, farming etc. But the concept of ‘Public Interest’ under the framework of co-operatives diverted into ‘individual interest’ where the members of the co-operative societies divided the land entitled to them and converted those lands into private property. This process is again another heinous process of privatising tribal lands into the property of non-tribals.

4.2.6: The Manipur Hill Areas (Acquisition of Chiefs Rights) Act 1967

Seven years after the implementation of the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act 1960, the government of Manipur has yet passed another legislation to alter the system of land holding among the hill tribes of Manipur. On 20 th June 1967, under the official notification No. 3/32/66-Act/L- the Legislative Assembly of Manipur has notified that it has received the assent of the President on 14 th June, 1967 to notify the Manipur Hill Areas (Acquisition of Chiefs Rights) Act, 1967. It is an act to provide for the acquisition of chiefs rights, title and interest of Chiefs in and over the Hill Areas of Manipur and matters connected therewith. Sub section 3 clause 1-4 of the act states,

“The Governor may, at any time, by notification in the Official Gazette, that as from such date as may be specified therein, the rights, titles and interest of the Gams in the villages of such areas as may be specified in the said notification shall stand transferred to and vested in the Government free from all encumbrances…….it shall not be lawful for the chiefs thereafter to collect changseo for any period after the date of vesting from any residence of a village in such areas”.

The act has been clearly designed to strip off each and every cultural and traditional rights possessed by the Chiefs who were considered as Lords of the Soil. The act has clearly stated how the Governor and the official Gazette is authorised to overtake and decommission the powers and entitlements of a chief. The biggest threat here is how easily the transfer of tribal land and the authority over it was facilitated just through a mere notification from the state. Following such transfer and abolition of the power vested in a chief, the act further describes the kind of authority and power a chief might hold. Section 16 sub-section 1 (A) and (B) of the act has mentioned that the chief will be allowed to retain only those land bought by him under settled cultivation and those area of land used by him as homestead, business premises or for industry and any other industrial purpose. This means that the Lord of the Soil will no longer have any form of ownership and control over the land other than his farm and housing areas.

Further, sub-section 2 of section 1 says, “Any person who is entitled to retain possession of any such land shall hold such land as owner thereof and the rights over such land shall be permanent heritable and transferrable”. This statement directly encounters the tradition and custom of the tribal land holding system thereby. Tribal lands under the constitution of India as well as under the traditional customs of tribal law have never been transferrable openly until the proposal of this act. Therefore, what this act has proposed is not only to abolish the chieftainship institution but to overturn the traditional systems of tribal governance.

The reverse benevolence of the act further extends by substantiating the shrewd provision of the MLR&LR Act 1960 which under sub-section 2 of section 1 attempts to remove the wordings “except the hill areas thereof” and replace the lines with “provided that in respect of the hill areas”. This means that the provisions of the protection of hill areas, as attempted by the MLR&LR Act, is being targeted by the Acquisition of Chiefs Rights aswell and hill areas will not be defined by geography but by the Administrator in the Official Gazette. Further, sub-section 1 of section 12 of the MLR&LR Act has a rather intriguing content which has been scheduled under the Acquisition of Chiefs Rights Act. The statement follows,

“provided that the residents of the hill areas shall, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, be allowed to take so much timber, fire wood or other natural products belonging to the Government for their domestic or agricultural purposes from any place within the hill areas, not being a reserve forest, as may be notified by the Government from time to time”.

The statement clearly signifies how the laws, which are presumably attempting to inculcate better systems of governance, are actually alienating the tribals from their actual rights to land. The statement has clearly pointed out how the tribals who owned the land and resources are now a subject of the state thereby having to move in line with the government laws and regulations. While simultaneously trying to portray how the act isn’t going to bring much of a difficulty to the traditional systems of existence, section 18 of the Acquisition of Chiefs Rights again mentions how the land area will be available for cultivation subjected to paying fees for the area cultivated which is further open for all including non-tribals. Such provisions are most unsuitable for the tribals tradition and culture and the imposition of such laws are apprehensively in lieu of better opportunities for the non-tribals.

The act, however, has not been implemented though many chiefs were ready to give up their authority and power. As stated by a local intellectual, the implementation could not take place merely because the chiefs demanded more compensation which the state could not afford at that time. Moreover, there was a difference in opinion between the Hill Areas Committee and the Legislative Assembly regarding the passing of the Bill. Therefore, the Abolition of Chieftainship in Manipur failed to take place while it took place successfully in the neighbouring state like Mizoram, and subsequently, tribal lands have been merely saved from being alienated to the state and the non-tribals.

4.2.7: Repeated amendments of Forest Act

1952 after independence-new forest act policies added further threats to tribal peoples. Under the old policy, forest land would be released for cultivation subject to certain safeguards and free grazing was allowed. Later, the policy barred cultivation and required paid permit for grazing which was difficult for the tribal to obtain. Thus the tribal Chief who regarded himself as the lord of the forest was through a deliberate process turned into a subject who is placed under the forest department. Tribal villages were no longer an essential part of the forest but were there merely on…(Sanga R). This implies that the traditional rights of the tribals were no longer recognised as rights. Carefully analysing the pattern of changes in the terminologies and sentences used in the wordings of the Forest Rights Acts over the years, we can see that the traditional age old rights and customs of free and undisturbed interrelation with land and the freedom to access and own them have been refined and redefined over the years thereby limiting the traditional and customary rights of the hill tribes. Such changes, for instance can be seen, such as:-

• In1894, they became rights and privileges
• In 1952 they became rights and concessions
• Now, they are regarded as concessions

Therefore, the dominance of the Forest Reservation as a legal entity is greatly hampering the autonomy and future self-sustainability of the Hill Tribes of Manipur. Even when the Guite Road was initially constructed, the compensation paid for the destructions incurred in the process of construction was given to the Forest Department. Compensations like these are given to the owners of the property who had incurred loss due to the project. So if the compensation was offered to the forest department, it means that the government considers them as the owners of the land while it has been clearly defined by the British themselves that these Tribal Chiefs are the Lords of the Soil and they have complete authority over the land. The intensity of this issue remained unexplored until the extension project was proposed, for which the forest department was appointed to measure the area of land that will be destroyed. Following which BRO would pay compensations to the Forest Department for the area of land acquired for construction. Alerted by this this issue, various tribal leaders and organisations like ZEPADA, went to the Deputy Commissioner and even to the chief secretary stating that the village Chiefs were supposed to be the rightful beneficiaries of compensation rather than the Forest Department. The response given was based on a Supreme Court Ruling which says that forest should be defined according to the dictionary meaning which defines forest as any plants or trees that stand of the land. This again gives ownership to the Forest Department which entitles the Forest Department to acquire compensations for the activities of the BRO. Contradictorily, according to the Land Acquisition Act, when the road enters the territory of a chief, the land is supposed to belong to the chief who is the owner of the resources within and above the land.

Definition of “Forest land” cannot be interpreted as per Dictionary meaning of Forest. The land we owned and managed in accordance with our traditional land holding system cannot be manipulated (COPTAM). The answer given was that trees and resources on land cannot grow or exist without the land, and land in this case is rightfully and traditionally owned by the chiefs. It doesn’t matter who planted what over a land, as long as chieftainship remains, that piece of land will always remain a chiefs land unless he willingly gives it away. So the chief is still the owner of the land and not the forest department who planted trees in it. As a result, the tribal chiefs are rightfully entitled for the compensation on destruction on land and the forest department is entitled to be compensated for the forest destroyed.

The Causes and Problems

Problems related to tribal land are diverse and complex in nature. These problems are often unnoticed as they are shadowed under the bureaucratic supremacy of the state. Therefore, identifying and locating such issues are a big challenge against the hill tribes of Manipur. As published by COPTAM has pointed out series of problems related to tribal land issue of Manipur. The points raised were as follows,

Great number of Hill district’s land records are being maintained and its revenue collected by the neighboring valley district while those villages are regularly paying Hill House Tax to their concern Hill District. The maintenance of Tribal villages’ Land Record and subsequent collection of land revenue by Valley Districts is the root cause of the problem overlapping census 2011 and distortion of District Boundary in Manipur. It is now apparent, was deliberate and part of a hidden agenda to take away Tribal lands and merge them into the Valley Districts. Thus maintaining of Land records by respective District is a must to check such interferences in future.

 

State government must immediately transfer all Hill land records to their respective Hill Districts as bounded by the original Hill District boundaries.

 

Double Taxing of Tribals: The peripheral tribal Villages with valley areas are subjected to paying Hill House Tax to concern Hill District as well as Land Revenue to Valley District. Such ill-treatment and atrocity towards the tribals is unconstitutional.

• Distorted District Boundary

The Manipur State Hill Peoples (Administration) Regulation, 1947 has specified the villages within the Hill Districts. This was reaffirmed by the Government of Manipur Order No.20/39/69-D Dated 12thNovember 1969 which details the Districts and administrative units to be created in Manipur.

Further, the Boundary of Hill Districts(the Autonomous District as well as the Revenue District) vide Government’s Notification No. 18/1/71-SC dated 14th February, 1972, was officially notified and accordingly the constituencies of the Autonomous District Councils was prepared.

There is no official alteration of the District Boundary till date.

The State Government and its Agencies has clandestinely been attempting to intrude tribal areas by unscrupulously drawing and redrawing of the District boundary. The tribal are shocked to learn that Manipur Remote Sensing Applications Centre (MARSAC),Imphal has published Manipur Map(2003) which completely distorted the Inter-District boundary to grab Tribal Lands. The revised and updated version of the said Map further distorted the inter-District boundary. This is found to be unhealthy in a multi-cultural state like Manipur.

(i) The State Government should ensure that the original Hill District boundary is restored and maintained on the basis of the villages’ land boundary recognised and recorded in the Manipur State Hill Peoples’ (Administration) Regulation, 1947.

(ii) The fact that some pockets of the Hill areas of Manipur are “surveyed land” is never a valid argument for transferring the said villages/areas to Valley District or converted them into a Revenue District. The Hill Department and concern Hill District administration are competent authority to deal with matters relating to management and maintaining of land records.

It was the lackadaisical of the government toward the issue is a concern. The tribal want to protect what they inherited from their forefather, their homeland.

• Constitutional Provision for Protection of Tribals:
• The British, during the colonial days declared and classified the tribal areas in India as “Excluded” and “Partially excluded” with an aim and object to preserved and protect the less sophisticated tribal from all forms of exploitation from outsiders.

After independence, the government of India attempted to safeguard the interests and well-being of its tribal population by including special provisions in the Fifth and the Sixth Schedules of the Constitution. While the Fifth Schedule outlined the structure of governance of Scheduled Areas in tribal interests, the Sixth Schedule was conceived as an instrument of tribal self-rule. Tribal areas in nine states of mainland India are included under the Fifth Schedule and the Sixth Schedule covers such areas in four northeastern states.

The hill districts of Manipur however were not included in either the Fifth or Sixth Schedules. Manipur is the only state of the seven northeastern states where the provisions of the Sixth Schedule have never applied.

For instances, recognition of any new villages in hill areas should be under the purview of the HAC as mandated by the Act, and it should be executed by the Tribal Affairs & Hills Department, Government of Manipur. The present practices of recognising new villages (in hill areas) by the Revenue Department, Government of Manipur base on mere Departmental Notification is highly condemnable as it violates the statutory power of the HAC Act, 1971 (COPTAM 2012).

5.1: Forest reserves under the working plan of Southern Division, Churachandpur District, Manipur:

The forest area of Churachandpur comes under the Southern Forest Division which was created on 25 th May 1973 under order No. 52/30/72 of the Secretariat Forest Department. The Manipur South District, Churachandpur was officially registered under the reorganisation of Manipur state 1969.The southern forest division, Churachandpur lies within 93 o15’ to 94 o00’ E-longitude and 24 o00’ to 24 o30 N- latitude. The Churachandpur division has a geographical area of 4570 sq. km, but according to the latest reorganisation, the southern division has an area of 4525 sq. kms. The variation is due to transfer of an area of 50.84 sq. kms near Kangwai Village to Bishnupur Forest Division under the pretext of its close location to Loktak Lake. Moreover, by excluding the area of the proposed Kaihlam/Keilam Wildlife Sanctuary which extends to 241.96 sq. kms, the geographical area is further limited to 4283 sq. kms. The total non-forest area under the Southern Forest Division is 402.86 sq. kms. This too has been objected by the Chiefs Association , but regardless of the effort, the implementation of the sanctuary is still under process. Once the implementation takes place, 21 villages around Kaihlam Hill will be displaced as a concern for Wild Life Protection. There various sets of protocol to be followed to undergo such activities such as gathering the consent of the people in the targeted area, issuing a proper notification letter and publishing it in a local newspaper that too in the local dialect of the area. No such processes have been acknowledged by the people though the project is being proposed long back.

The division has four protected forest including (1) Churachandpur Protected Forest including areas of Churachandpur-Khoupum (2) TuiningTuicham (3) Churachandpur TipaimukhRoadside PF and (4) Churachandpur-Singngat state Highway. The villagers within these areas are entitled certain rights to access the land for grazing, cultivation, fire woods, hunting and other forest products vide Government order no. 124-E 100 and No. 43-E-34 dated 21-9-1996 & dated 27-6-1966 and the same was published in Manipur Gazette Notification No. 55/10/65-66. In the case of Road Side Protected forest, areas measuring 60 m wide from the berm on either side of the road from Churachandpur to Tipaimukh excluding notified areas and village land and Churachandpur to Singngat along Churachandpur-Singngat state Highway was also declared as protected forest vide Govt. order No. 55/10/65-66 M(2) dt 27-6-1979 and the same were published in Manipur Gazette notification No.13. But the alignment of Churachandpur Singngat state Highway keeps on changing time to time.

An in-depth interview with MDC reveals the following:

The Darbar Resolution No. 10A of 20-07-1932 has classified the forest of Manipur into four distinctive categories:-

1. Hill Village Reserve: these are areas mainly within one fourth mile radius of a recognised hill village and where the hill villages concerned have exclusive rights to cut fuel and wood.
2. Valley Village Reserve: these are forest areas close to a valley village close to the hills enjoy fuel and food rights.
3. State Reserves: these are forest areas in which there may or may not be villages and whose notification was required.
4. Open Forest: these are areas where any person may cut fuel and wood after obtaining permit issued at a normal price from hill office. The Forest Department will allot localities in which the wood may be collected and will supply all details regarding any of these reserves.

Further, the following rights and privileges have been granted by the state to the villagers:

1. Wood Right: the local hill villagers were allowed to cut fire wood from their village land for their own buildings, firewood, and wooden implements without obtaining permit from the forest department vide order No. 21 of dated 14-2-1933 of PMSD. However, no virgin forest can be cleared or burnt for jhuming without sanctions form the Manipur State Durbar vide standing order No.2 of dated 17-4-1934. When valuable trees are required, they will obtain a free permit from the Forest Department and cut trees marked by the forest department.
2. Royalty Exemption: State government in order No 1-F.R.11/55-56 dated 16-5-56 granted certain concessions privilege to the people for enjoyment of forest produce from open reserve, by exempting royalty on the following categories.
   • Finished produces like wooden tray, husking poles, handloom implements, furniture made of canes or bamboo, wood brought down in head loads for personal use.
   • Firewood, bamboos, canes, brought down by head loads for sae in market places.
   • Fuel wood, building materials, thatching grass removed or taken from Patta land on which regular revenue is paid. For movement, a transit permit is to be obtained from forest office after verification.

It also imposed a condition that the above concessions were liable to be cancelled or restricted whenever Government felt it necessary. Therefore, it is clear how the state has legally taken toll over the tribal lands though it claims to respect the sanctity of tribal autonomy. More or less, larger sections of the tribal lands have come under the control of the state through this policy of forest reserve where their traditional patterns of linkages with forest has become rights granted by the state subjected to cancellations and restrictions whenever the government felt necessary. The very essence of a tribe is inextricably linked with land and forest, without which, the most important characteristic of a tribe is absent. So the demarcation of forest areas and the of setting rules and legislations which necessitates legal rights, permissions and royalty exemptions are a deliberate means of gaining control and ownership over the tribal lands.

The basic fundamental life support systems of these ethnic minorities are attached to natural resource which defines their identity, culture and very means of existence. Majority of the hill dwellers are still dependent on the system of Jhumcultivation/Shifting cultivation. Their basic food habits and day to day necessities including basic household equipment’s are dependent on forest products. The uniqueness of these communities also lies on the egalitarian nature of their social structure where each and every individual has an un-restricted access to natural resources except for very few cases where certain areas has been conserved as community reserve forest to maintain the ecological balance and also for instant relief in times of emergencies and disasters, or, preserving and worshipping certain areas of land or mountains as sacred groves. Hence, one could see that the indigenous communities (who are commonly understood as backward and irresponsible large scale deforesters –‘Slash-and-Burn’) also have their own traditional systems to regulate ecological balances despite their traditional practice of Jhum cultivation. This form of inter-connection and inter-dependence with nature explains the inevitable relationship of indigenous people with ecology and nature.

5.2: Co-operative societies

Co-operative societiescan acquire land in a tribal society of Manipur which is to be allotted by the District council if their purpose is for public interest and benefit. What happened was that District council failed to conduct its elections for 20 continuous years in Manipur. In 1988, ATSUM made a huge demand for 6 th schedule in Manipur for which they made a memorandum to the government of Manipur stating that that there should be no District Council election in Manipur until 6 th Schedule is granted. Following this, the government of Manipur omitted elections of the ADC for the following 20 years. As per the law, if a non-tribal (including co-operatives) wants to acquire land, he has to take the consent of the MDCs, SDO and DC of the concerned area. But, due to the absence of a functional District council for 20 years, the deputy commissioner or the CEOs concerned were authorised to allot land to non tribals and co-operatives. Due to the failure of a proper local self-governance during this period, several allotments of tribal lands were made to co-operatives in the districts of Churachandpur, Jiribam, Sadar Hills etc. Once land is allotted to the co-operatives, the problem was that no one was there to regulate the function of the co-operatives and follow up if the co-operatives were in line with their aims and objectives and memorandum of associations. Land was supposed to be transferred back to the tribals if the initiatives fail. But due to the lack of a proper local self-governance, certain co-operatives are not known even if they are functioning or non-functioning regardless of serving public interest. And the biggest threat is that the tribal land allotted to them is not being returned. But rather, the land allotted to them for serving public interest is now being divided among the members as an individual property.

Though tribal areas are protected from non tribals, the non-tribals have tried to claim that they are also people of Manipur so why shouldn’t they be allowed to live in tribal lands. But as they were legally constrained from acquiring land in the tribal populated areas like Churachandpur, they started introducing co-operatives such as piggery, horticulture, farming etc. through which land was offered though they were non-tribal as the co-operatives were in public interest and public benefit. Through this process, many non tribals have acquired land in the name of the co-operatives which are divided among the non-tribal members, and today, they have become localities of the non-tribal people within a tribal periphery.

5.3: Without chieftainship

In Mizoram, a huge social movement under the Mizo Union was initiated to abolish the Sailo Chiefs 1952.

The “Quit India movement” and the political activities of the Congress and other political activities had greatly influenced the educated Lushai youth in the Lushai Hills. As we already said, the Lushais who had joined the services and had the opportunity to mix with people of other nations and states of India during the war also played an important role in the political awakening of the Lushais. They did not like the idea of handing over power to the “chiefs’ councils” and wanted to be part and parcel of the union of India and enjoy all the privileges enjoyed by the people of other provinces after independence. So Mizo youths wanted to organize themselves into a political party As a result, a political party called Mizo Union, for the first time ever in the Mizo history was formed in 1946 by R.Vanlawma who organized the youth and educated people in Lushai Hills District on April, 9, 1946. Initially, that new political party was named “The Mizo Common People’s Union Party”. Later the name of the party was simplified as the Mizo Union ……The basic objections of the party were to do away with the chieftainship, ensure better employment opportunities for Mizos in Mizoram and reunification of all Mizosunder one administrative unit (JK Patnaik 2010).

A recent Mizo political leader while speaking to R.Sanga stated,

“Kan lo hrelou a heikantisuallek der mawle. KanSailolaltekan lo duh lohle a, kan lo paihthla a, automatic in Sailolal a tlawmniatang in Mizoram pumpui India Government ah alutdaih. Aneitutaktakkannitawh lo, amaerawhchu state ah kanawmavangin, a population Mizo kan tam a, aneituang in kanawmmaimai a, Ram neihnakanneitawh der lo”. (We didn’t know, but we have committed a grave mistake. We didn’t want our Sailo Chiefs, we removed them, and automatically the day Sailo Chieftainship was abolished, the whole state of Mizoram mergedunder the government of India. We are no longer the original owners. We formally live in the state and as the Mizo population is majority, we act like the owners, but we don’t really own the land anymore).

So in our context also, the only reason why even the Indian government cannot do whatever it likes to the hill tribes is only because of the existence of the Chief system (Sanga R). There are certain differences between the Chief systems followed by the Nagas, Kukis and the Zomis. The Nagas follow the Khulakpa system (Meitei origin) which is a community based form of governance and is used synonymous to Chief but is not literally equivalent to Chieftainship. Chief is something like a King, or the Lord of the Soil. The Nagas elect their chiefs and they have a Village Council, but among the Paites, we have Village Authorities. So there have been several attempts regarding transforming the Village Authority into a village council which has been opposed so far. So, there has been an attempt to abolish chieftainship institution in 1965-67. This movement led to a huge tussle between the people and the chiefs. Even the Paite National Council supported this movement during which Pu.Goukhenpau was the president of the council. He even got elected as the Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) and attained Minister Hood during which the Chiefs Rights Acquisition Act 1967 was passed. So it was decided that Chiefs should be paid compensations in exchange of their chief hood. But this did not get implemented merely because they could not come to an agreeable amount of compensation for both sides. Had this act been implemented, chieftainship would have been dissolved by then and we would have been in the same situation with that of Mizoram.

So, firstly, the presence of a chief however good or bad it may be, protects the virginity of the land directly or indirectly. Secondly, in a modern era under democratic institution, some might have the perception that chiefs are simply out-dated or not effective enough. But, the fact is that even if the chieftainship institution is to be abolished, the time is not yet right. There should at least be some kind of a properly defined set of protection for tribal land, say 6 th Schedule. And there must be a proper mutual decision on the terms and conditions under such process as an age old system of governance will be taken over by a new form of governance. For example, under the Suspension Of Operation (SOO), the Paites are demanding for an Autonomous Hill State. Suppose such demands were fulfilled, it would be reasonable enough to abolish the system as land will any way be protected. But even if chieftainship is to be abolished, it is advisable that their status should be uplifted and the chiefs should receive royalty regardless of the amount. This will honour the chieftainship institution which is essential as it is the only institution which determines our distinctiveness as an indigenous tribal community. It is that unique characteristic which keeps us distinct and discrete from others. Some chiefs may surely be difficult to bear. Some might even be corrupt. But their existence should not be jeopardised as they are the institution which has defined and protected our identity as a unique indigenous group of people (Sanga R).

5.4: Migration: Causes and Consequences

Cases of migration from villages are observed to be taking place to a huge extent lately. Migration in itself is indeed reasonable to a great extent as the livelihood security level in the hill villages are deteriorating to a great extent. So, looking for better living conditions, people do migrate from the hills living behind everything they have owned. In such cases, it is presumable that there will be many who migrated out of free will, packed with enough resources to set up a living in the town. But it is also clear that it is impossible for all the migrants to share the same scenario. For many, they might be leaving behind their only means of livelihood and everything they have. Furthermore, it is quite amusing to see people migrate from a place where all the resources such as land, water, vegetables and so on are available for free, and choose to live in a place where everything has to be bought. Moreover, regardless of the uncertainty of their sources and means of livelihood, some would even choose to pull Rickshaw to make a living while they could have been living a more sufficient life in the villages. Based on the data gathered, the researcher has found that most cases of migration are taking place for the following reasons:

• Tired being under the Chief : – few cases of migration have been found to have occurred due to the cruelty of the chief. The hereditary character of the chieftainship institution has indeed its own positive and negative aspects. Its negative side being that though the previous chief might be a kind and generous one, there is no guarantee that his predecessor will be. This is the exact case that is taking place in many villages. Though this might not be the ultimate excuse, it is indeed a reason for many. When the chief misuses his authority, it easily becomes unbearable for the villagers which results in the favour of migration for the villagers.
• Higher education : – education has become one important factor in the lives of the tribals in Manipur. The rate of literacy is growing rapidly and there is a rising realisation of the importance of higher education. But, the problem is that none of the government schools in these villages are functioning. In some villages, the buildings have collapsed, and almost in all the villages, the teachers are not there. The only schools available are church based schools run by the Evangelical Baptist Convention Church (EBCC), Presbyterian Church of India (PCI ®) and the Roman Catholic schools. If we look at the Paite tribe inhabited villages under the Guite Road and Tipaimukh Highway, there is only one village which has facilities till tenth standard. All the other high schools are junior high schools or primary schools. So, when prospective students need to pursue higher education, they are bound to leave the village in search of better educational facilities. This condition often compels migration of the whole family which would not have been necessary had there been proper educational amenities in the village.
• Social Security: – looking for better educational facilities, health care institutions as the quality of health care in villages are not dependable nor accessible in most areas. So, in times of emergencies and distress, they are bound to come to town even for the slightest medical care. This is again an expensive affair due to the inexplicably awful means of transportation and road conditions supplemented by the extremely expensive travelling cost.
• Seen as a trend of growth : – Prospects of developing oneself are lesser than that of living in towns for the long run. Shifting from a village which is remote and deprived of accessibility and various basic human needs to a developing town is seen as a process of growth and development. They consider themselves as getting closer to better opportunities in life.
• Break through from an age old tradition of hard work : – Productivity of the land is not the ultimate issue. But, the pattern of farming has changed its shape looking at the past few decades. Farming still remains as an occupation, but unlike 30-40 years back, people do not invest that much energy that has been invested in those days. The area of farming has decreased, people have become weaker and lazier and the amount of family members working in the field are decreasing as there are many other lines of occupation which are diverting the youth lately. This was not the case in the past, back in those days, farming was the only business, so all the time and energy of the people was invested in farming. Therefore, a family easily produced much more than they would need for a year. But today, there are many other aspirations that can divert the attention of the youth who seek to have a better future. So,divergence of interest from farming to other non-farm activities is taking place. Indeed, it is reasonable enough that they would also want to escape from this age old tradition of hard work and procure a government service or other less labour intensive occupation. After all, it is also the aspiration of every parent to have their children escape from hard labour and instead have a child who is educated and who becomes an officer.
• Unpleasant Under Ground activities : another factor which can be responsible could be due to unpleasant experiences with the underground groups active in those areas. For example, in the year 2001, a massive shoot out took place between the tribal outfits and the plain area outfits in Thanlon village which went on from morning to midnight and resulted in the death of one villager and many others being kidnapped by the plain area outfits. This event has terrorised the villagers and scatted them to nearby villages and jungles. Due to this particular experience, almost half of the village population migrated from the village instantly for fear of such events to take place again. One other similar case could be the Parbung rape Case in 2006 where the Plain area outfits openly raped the Parbung women and terrorised the entire village. Besides such experiences, even without being terrorised also, it seems to be unsafe and unpleasant to live with the UGs in several occasions as a matter of safety. It also seems to be an expensive affair at times to meet the needs of such outfits for several households which made them choose to rather leave the village and live somewhere else undisturbed. There have been cases in the past when the outfits used to shoot any domestic animal they wanted for consumption without even paying a proper price to their owners. Cases like these make it unbearable for the villages to live.

One common reason for all the reasons stated above is ‘survival’. Survival being the main issue of migration, we can create the assumption that life in the villages are filled with challenges and difficulties of various sorts which is abandoning the tribal villages from its inhabitants. Two major problems can emerge out of this issue:

1. The exodus of Tribal population from the hills and the extensive conglomeration into towns will create an imbalance in the economic productivity and demand as economic sustainability in a town like Churachandpur is still unstable. Moreover, agricultural lands are constantly being liquidised for housing plots and private lands. So if not now, people will still have to migrate back to villages again in the rear future.
2. Hills and villages are the symbol of tribal culture. Without villages, the fundamental category of a tribe would be absent. So, villagers are the guardians of the tribes and their luring out of the villages is not a good sign for the future of the tribes.

5.5: Land use pattern

The traditional pattern of land use among the Paite tribe is accustomed to Shifting Cultivation since times immemorial. This pattern of cultivation still exists and remains the primary source of livelihood. In terms of productivity, this form of farming has no limitation. But, it has been observed that the level of production has decreased compared to the past few decades in the past, one family could harvest enough paddy to last more than one year. But today, that has become difficult though there is sufficient land to cut down each year and shift the next year. However, the challenge here is the extensive deforestation which is assumed to poses threat to the ecological sustainability of the land. The pattern of shifting cultivation is being supervised by the chief who looks for cultivable land across different directions with his member of councils. Generally, once a particular section has been cultivated, that same section is no longer considered for cultivation that consecutive year. If cultivation was done in the north, the next year, east, west and southern hills will be considered. In this way, the ecology gets time to redevelop and recycle itself until it is time to get back to the same field again.

The real challenge with the sustainability of shifting cultivation comes when we look at the time span for the cultivated area to redevelop which is usually between a span of five to ten years depending on the vegetation of the area. So between this gap of five to ten years, it means that another five to ten areas are cut down again to take the same amount of time to reform itself naturally. This means that, the cutting down process is fast but the regeneration process is really slow. Therefore, in this process of constant deforestation and gradual regeneration of ecology, the ultimate outcome is climate change which has changed immensely during the past few decades where the level of rain water has decreased and the temperature has increased extensively.

This issue can be challenged only by building up a dependable alternative livelihood source for the farmers who are dependent on agriculture. Several attempts have been made to introduce alternatives like farming of Zathropha, Lemon Grass etc.ZEPADA has endorsed the Lease System under which the land owner or the chief should not sell the land but lease it out to the people interested in utilising the land. For example, if a person is interested in farming activities, then the person should be given access to the land for a given period of time, during which the person utilising the land should pay the rent to the land owner as per the agreement made. Another example related to this issue is the coming of companies like mobile phone companies who require land to build their mobile towers. The companies were asked to take the land on lease and not buy it, so the companies rent the land and the owner of the land remains the owner.

But all these efforts again are challenged with serious complexities as the farming system demands huge monetary and time invested in the process during which the farmers will face huge economic consequences until the first harvest is ready. Nonetheless, such farming activities requires huge capitals which the farmers are mostly deprived of, so the possibility of Contract Farming also rises.

The ultimate conclusion which could be made out of this is that the pattern of land use will change ultimately. There is a huge possibility that a rising trend of privatisation of land will take place. With the introduction of private farming, a larger gap between the capable and the incapable will raise leading to a larger societal stratification of this tribal society. Of course, the lease system can safeguard the authority of the chief over land to a great extent, but without having control over those lands for a multiple consecutive years, the image of chieftainship will change especially with the descending generations. After all, the land is going back to the chief after the lease period is over. But again another constraint can be that after consecutively exploiting the fertility of the land, even if the land goes back to the chief, the usefulness and the value of the land would have decreased to a huge extent.

5.6: Current scenario of land: Property, Investment, Power and Trend

The concept of private land is not new to the Paite customary land relation system. There are indeed private lands within the village communities itself and most of these lands are protected equally under the traditional rights and power of the custom and the chief. Most of these lands are safe even after the owners do not live in the village. Hence, private lands do exist in tribal communities’ aswell even in the absence of the MLR&LR Act 1960. There are private farms and irrigated paddy fields in some village’s aswell which are recognised by the community and no issue has ever been raised on the context of ownership unless the chief wants to claim it back in very rare cases. However, the main problem here is not privatisation of land but the intrusion and accommodation of non-tribals in private lands. Even if these lands are privatised, they are still owned by tribal persons who does not hamper or disturb the tribal custom as the utmost priority is to safeguard tribal land from non-tribals.

The main difference between the kinds of privatisation of land being propagated by the Paite Customary law and the MLR&LR Act 1960 is that the Paite custom does not include non-tribals in the process of privatisation while the MLR&LR Act does include even the non-tribals which is the biggest threat for the tribals safety and future sustainability.

The major difference between private lands in tribal villages and private lands in MLR&LR implemented areas is that the former has no legal document called Patta to prove that certain area belongs to him. But, with the permission of the Chief, the individual can register that piece of land as a Gift Deed in the SDO Office and claim ownership of that land. Under this deed, that individual can even sell or retain the land after leaving the village. But, the chief also has the power to reclaim that land once the original owner is gone because the land has no original patta for that land. In some cases, as long as the farm is cultivated or the trees in that farm are standing, the land belongs to the individual, and once the trees are cut down, the chief re-owns the land. Even without a registered, village lands have been sold to another individual, but the chief has the utmost power to claim those pieces of land any time depending on his interest. Therefore, a lot of similarity can be seen with the Patta system. But in this case, the chief is still the ultimate owner and a lot depends on the personality and instinct of the chief as well.

However, under MLR&LR Act, once a Patta for a land is acquired, the chief has no say what so ever the usage of the land may be. Therefore, the chief becomes more or less powerless over that land which has acquired legal Patta. That is why in areas under MLR&LR Act, the chiefs, even if they exist, own only the plot of land they are currently living upon as every other are which they once owned as a chief belongs to private individuals who holds a legal document recognising that the land belongs to them.

On the other hand, however, the current scenario of privatisation of land among the Paite’s has also extensively widened in Churachandpur. Productive agricultural areas are rapidly being liquidised for private plots, and side by side, ownership of private farms in the hills has become a fashionable trend lately. This practice has, to a great extent, increased the value of land in the social psychology of the developing tribal elites . As stated by a local intellectual, “people will soon choose to invest in buying and building farm houses in the hills rather than buying flats in metro cities. This is an incubating trend among the Paite elites”. While extensive oppositions against the MLR&LR Act, this is again another dimension of alienating land from the marginal sections as huge areas of cultivable and fertile lands are being privatised.

Another plausible scenario of land alienation can be cited through various developmental projects like the Khuga Dam project; the cases of Oil exploration currently taking place and the tussle between the villagers and the armed outfits in Kangkap Village over the issue of relocation. These issues can be broadly classified as internationally, nationally and locally emerging challenges afflicting the virgin relationship and interdependence between tribals land and forest. Let us discuss the following cases in detail:

5.6.1: Khuga Dam issue

Mata-Mualtam is a village in Churachandpur district which is about 28 kms from the District Headquarter. It is the first village Khuga dam submerged as it is the nearest village in the upstream from the dam site. There are 80 households with a Schedule Trieb population of 472 individuals consisting of 231 male and 241 female populations (2001 Census). There are 5 communities living together since the establishment of the village about 70 years ago. The communities are Paite, Sukte (Tedim-Chin), Simte, Hmar, Zou tribes. They have spoken a dialect unique of the village which is a combination of the dialects of all tribes.

The main occupation of people in this village is agriculture and they heavily depend on wetland paddy cultivation. Wetland Paddy Cultivation is the main occupation as well as the main source of livelihood and income for most families in this village. They also engaged seasonally in shifting cultivation and dryland farming for additional food and source of income. Non-farm activities include cutting timber and selling woods as well as wage labour of different works. The village governance is Chieftainship system with LianCinKhupNaulak as the Chief, heir from his father DouchinthangNaulak who was the founder of the village, and the Chief has a council called the Village Authority in which the Chief is the Chairman. The VA will decide on every matters relating to the village.

The Khuga Dam Multipurpose Project is located at Mata village, about 10km away from Lamka town in Churachandpur. The dam is located in the latitude of 24 ˚ 00` N and longitude of 93 ˚ 50` E. Khuga Multi Purpose Project occupies an area of 856 meters between two mountains in the hill. Khuga dam is on the river khuga, Khuga River is one of the most important tributaries of the Imphal River. It originates in the hills of Singngat sub-division of Churachandpur District. It flows towards the north and joins the Imphal River at Ithai in Bishnupur District atthe southern edge of Loktak Lake. One can access the site through Tiddim road which is 10Km away from Lamka town. The artificial lake attracts many tourists within and outside the state. Though it eliminates many flora and fauna; displaced many living beings and submerged large chunk of land, the place become one of the mostly attractive site for the media.

The Khuga Multipurpose Dam project formulated during late 1970s was approved by the Planning Commission in July 1980, followed by the state governments administrative approval inAugust 1980. The present Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh laid Khuga dam multipurposeproject foundation when he was Deputy Chairman of the Union Planning Commission in1982. Originally, the proposed dam was to be at Mawngkot near M.T.Geltam Village but It was then shifted to the present site near Mata village 15 km away from Mawngkot and 10 km away fromLamka town. As per the original plan, the dam was scheduled to operate in 1987 with the initial budget estimated to be Rs 16 crore, which did not include rehabilitation, resettlement and water supply cost. The work contract was awarded to Amlapali, a private Company in 1983.However, without any known reason Amlapali stopped their work in 1984 and the remainingwork was taken up by Natural Project Construction Corporation Limited (NPCC) from 1990,but stopped it again in 2000 due to clearance of bills. The target for completion of KhugaMulti-Purpose Project has been revised yet again as construction activities are far behind the earlier target of 2002-03. Even though the completion target was revised in 2003, at the least going by the snail paced progress of construction works the Government has rescheduled the target at 2005-06. The dam was inaugurated by Smt. Sonia Gandhi, UPA Chairperson, on the 12 th November, 2010 even though the Hydro-electric project, irrigation and water supply projects are not yet completed.

Khuga multi-purpose project, an earthen dam is 38 meters high, 230 meters wide and 300meters length at top with a death storage level of 836, 00 meter. The type of the dam is aZoned Earthen Dam. 52,400 Cubic meter volume of concrete are used in the dam with earthfilled volume of 6, 84, 000, 00 Cubic meters. The catchment area up to the dam site shares anarea of 21 square kilometer or 120.37 square miles. The reservoir area of 717 hectare of landand catchment area of 483 hectares coming a total area of 1200 hectare in both. The dam hastwo canals which will supply water for drinking as well for irrigation.

Khuga dam, on completion, will supply water for irrigation to15,000 hectares of land to Lamka, Saikot and Kumbi area. It will irrigate 150 squarekilometres of land within 20 km of the dam site. The water to be supplies through left andright cannel of the proposed 20 Km and 30 Km each. Besides the project will generate 1.75Mega Watt of electricity in-house through 3 Generator of 500 Kilo Watt each and provide 5million Gallons of drinking water per day to Churachandpur town. The district when powerfor electricity is ready, will used 15 percent of the output for the district alone.

The following are the actual benefits and the government figure of benefits achieved so far inirrigation: there is no double cropping till date from any part according to the proposed.Though the proposed right side canal, which will bring water to Kumbi, Saikot and tillMoirang is 203 km long, only 20 km is completed and this also did not benefit any one tillnow. The canal also leads to flooding during the rainy season in the surrounding areas and leakages in the earthen canal that create floods and destroyed standing crops.The left side canal which is proposed to be 30 kmlong for Lamka, Tuibong, and Salbung area paddy field as well as drinking water for the townis also incomplete, only 6.5 km has been constructed. The work on the minor field channelshas been inadequate to take irrigation water to paddy field even in the first phase of the command area.Khuga Dam Project will irrigate 15,000 hectares of land toSaikot area in Churachandpur and Kumbi area in Bishnupur. Till the research work is done, there is nota single benefit given by the project to the people except for some canal work Contractors andthe village chiefs where the canal passes through. The drinking water benefits of the dam have always been presented as a strong argument in favour of the project and some of the benefits promised by the government were; the dam will provide 5 million gallons of drinking water per day to the town. The town faced water problems since many years back and as the population increased, water requirement of the town increased tremendously. But the canal and pipe line which supply drinking water to town hasnot yet been completed and there is no guarantee of the benefits from the dam.

According to the government estimation the dam will generate 1.75 MW of electricity andwill be sufficient for the state. The Loktak Hydro Electric Project (3×35 MW) commissioned in 1984 is so forthe main source of power supply in the State which generate barely 90 MW has beenharnessed in the form of one medium project and micro projects and the present requirementof the State is 120 MW during peak hours.

5.6.2: The case of Oil Exploration

The extractive nature of developmental initiative in specific to oil exploration can be traced back to 2009 when the Joint Secretary of India under the Ministry Of Petroleum And Natural Gas Mr. D.N. NarasimhaRaju issued an announcement regarding India’s New Exploration Licensing Policy for exploration of Oil and Natural Gas at seventy exploration blocks across India. The oil blocks were opened for companies to bid on a production sharing basis with attractive offers such as income tax holiday; no custom duty on imports required for petroleum operations; freedom in terms of avoiding any mandatory state participation and so on. The terms and offers seems to benefit the state at 12.5 per cent for oil and 10 per cent for natural gas, other than this, all the benefits are awarded to the companies and no mention has been made about the people or the owners of the lands they will be exploiting.

It has been estimated that Manipur has atleast 5000 billion cubic feet of oil which will accommodate 30 oil fields on land. This category falls under Part E (on-land) blocks of the NELP-VIII. Two oil blocks have been identified under the Assam-Arakan basin falling under three districts Imphal East (Jiribam), Tamenglong and Churachandpur which is officially recorded as Block I (AA-ONN-2009/1) and Block II (AA-ONN-2009/2). Block I is estimated to cover an area of 2,217 sq. kms and Block II is estimated to cover 1,740 sq. kms which sums up to 3,957 sq. kms of land covering an equivalent of one-sixth of Manipur’s total geographical area, which is correspondingly a home to about thirty three indigenous tribal communities who have historically resided and protected those lands. This exploration and drilling works has been license to the Jubilant Oil and Gas Private Limited (JOGPL), based in the Netherlands. The Production Sharing Contract for Manipur Oil Block I was signed on June 30, 2010 and the Petroleum Exploration License was granted by the Manipur Government on September 23, 2010. The Contract for Manipur Block II was signed on July 19, 2010 and the license was granted by the Manipur Government on September 20, 2010. The deeds for the exploration licenses were signed on November 15, 2010 by the principle secretary O. Nabakishore.

Substance to this is the concept of eminent domain which claims that all mineral deposits within the territory of India belong to the state. However, the state must also realise the limits of its jurisprudence and its obligation to the welfare of its people who are also vested with a set of protection and fundamental rights as a human being; as a community and as a society with an identity. Strong signs of people’s resistance and protest against the project have been paid no heed other than filing an FIR on the protesters under various charges at Nungba on August 17, 2012. All the more confusing part is the repeated attempt of the state to convince the people into accepting the project by conducting campaigns in the name of gathering informed consent but in actuality is stressing on one side of the coin and giving biased lectures on the issue. For instance, experiences from the recent Public hearing on the issue of Tipaimukh Dam held at Tipaimukh on 31 March 2008 was explained by an elderly villager of Lungthulien village as …..

“The Deputy Commissioner (Jacintha Lazarus, IAS) of Churachandpur district who arrived with a good number of security forces displayed a patronising and dictatorial attitude. Majority of us did not understand what they were lecturing as they spoke in a language that was foreign to us. If the authorities thought they were conducting consultation, I must say that was a big lie. None of us were given an opportunity to speak. They handpicked few pro-dam speakers and that was how it vainly ended” (Arora V &Kipgen N, 2012)

It is a dubious process of gathering (the so called) informed consent within such hallucinating mesmerisation’s and induced hypnosis of the simple, illiterate and unpretentious villagers who can be easily manipulated especially by such elitist figures. Besides, the mystifying and appealing monetary offers in an indigenous tribal community, where organic resources are used more than that of paper money which has a different inexplicable and trivial value; it is also understandable that the villagers will find it hard to understand the complications of such technical explorative projects in exchange of some meagre monetary compensation.

5.6.3: Proposed relocation of Kangkap village

Kangkap is an interior Paite village located in churachandpur district,Singngat sub-division. It is117kms away from the nearest town (churachandpur) and is 5kms away from its nearest point to Guite Road for which one has to track down toTuima Village as the only road connections available are Mud Roads and Foot Path. According to the 2001 Census, there are 160 households, but currently, there are exactly 55 houses with a population of 675 persons consisting of 276 male and 399 female members belonging to Scheduled Tribe population (2001 Census). The village was established in 1881bythe thenchiefMr.PumlalGuite who has been awarded the legal recognition of his land (Patta) by the British ICS Officer Colonel Shakesperes B.C Gasper in 1918. The village is administered by the Village Council and the Council members of the chief as the actual chief is currently residing in churachandpur town.

However, of late, the village has been under intense political pressure from the Zomi based outfits operating in that area which has divided and created differences in opinion among the villagers. Instigated by the Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA), the relocation of the village to an area called Phitlamin, a nearby boundary of Pangmual village (which is in Burma/Myanmar) has been proposed for certain undisclosed geo-political reasons. The proposal was given on an open ground where the villagers were given the freedom to choose if they wanted to comply or refuse. But, the proposition was also accompanied by certain offers like an Inter Village Road (IVR) passing through the new village; construction of Hospital and better inter village communication with the nearby villages. Prior to the proposal, the council members of the chief gave a prior consent without taking the opinion of the villagers which infuriated some sections of the village population and divided the village into three broad categories, (1) group of people who are willing to comply, (2) group of people who are willing to deny and stay behind, (3) group of people who are willing to migrate to nearby villages. This issue has therefore sparked a wave of political tension between the villagers and the end result is yet to be known. Looking at the case scenario, the village council members do have the right to take decisions on behalf of the villagers they represent. However, crucial decisions like these, taken on uncommon grounds or without the prior consent of the villagers are not viable in the process of tribal self-governance.

The point is that while state sponsored land alienations in the forms of land reforms and forest acts have been criticised and opposed as a process of suppression and victimisation of tribals from their land and freedom, if such decisions like relocation of villages are taking place without the proper interest of the chief or the villagers, then there seems to be rather a narrow difference in principle with the state policies either. Similar to the way the state laws have been criticised for deteriorating the power and status of the chief, this case too, though internally taking place, seems to be less different in the lines of traditional and customary culture of tribal self-governance. The point is that while threats and problems related to land are mostly focussed on the state, there are some inevitable problems emerging within the tribes time to time and it is essential that these problems are minimised as problems like these can easily become a point of entry for state intervention like the way the 4 thAmendment of the Village Authority Act has proposed that the state government shall take charge immediately as and if the Village Authority fails to govern.

5.7: Situating the Paites amidst the issues:

The genesis of thechanging processes in land relation among the Paite tribe can therefore be traced back since the time of the British who introduced the concept of demarcation of boundaries; the concept of administration; the concept of legal documents and official recognition of chieftainship.However, the British intervention among the Paite Tribes has never been pointed out as a threat because their intervention was rather an attempt to regulate a better system of administration so that the land, traditional culture and custom of these people can be safeguarded. As mentioned in Chapter 4 (1), the hills have been administered as a Hill Independent Country under the West Bengal Regulation 1738. However, with the departure of the British, the hill tribes who were rather simple and politically unaware to make use of the laws protecting them got to be merged under the administration of Manipur.

Today, under the administration of Manipur, tribal lands are being constantly under the shadows of the state’s precarious attempt to open them up to non-tribals and bring the lands and the Hills under the government records. Year after year, Laws and Acts have been enacted to control the protected tribal lands and these legislations are being constantly amended to enhance their access to tribal areas. Initially, the Village Authority Act was passed to decentralise the system of local governance among the hill tribes while they have been historically governed under the chief. Later in 1957, the Acquisition of Chiefs Rights Act was again notified which almost got passed but did not merely because they could not agree on the terms of compensation with the chiefs. Then in 1960, the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reform Act was passed which has promoted and legally recognised privatisation of land into the hands of the individuals and survey and record land areas into the states records.

Looking at the paradigm and timeline of laws imposed to the hills, it is clear how the state is attempting to cease the traditional institutions of land holding and governance of the Hill Tribes. The abolition of chieftainship would certainly mean that the entire land which belonged to the chief would now belong to the state. The distinctiveness of a tribe is vested in their custom, culture and land. Without land, the very definition and meaning of tribals are deeply challenged. The decentralisation of the village administration itself has to a vast extent impacted on the importance and power of the chieftainship institution. The state could have directly recognised the chieftainship institutionas a legal and formal system of governance if it really cared about the future sustainability of the tribes, but under the pretext of development, the central government and the state is even proposing the implementation of PESA (Panchayati Raj Extension to Scheduled Areas)which is completely irrelevant for the tribal community in Manipur as they are under the administration of the Chief. More or less, under the Village Authority Act 1950, there is not much of a difference with the establishment of Panchayati Raj Institution as both are decentralising the village administration system and also introducing the politics of inclusion and representation through its democratic approach.

The criticality of the case of the Manipur tribals is that neither the 5 th Schedule nor the 6 th Schedule have been designated properly and they have been given a special provision under Article 371 C of the Constitution of India which entitles the enactment of the Hill Area Committee (HAC) which will be the apex body to represent the Hill Tribes of Manipur in all matters related to governance but not on money bill because there is no direct funding allotted to the ADC for the Hill Tribes. Every piece of funding availed by the Hill Tribes goes through the state in the form of Grant in Aid. Therefore, the concept of ADC has not been helpful for the Hill Tribes in making them autonomous in the true sense. Moreover, even the HAC is not really helpful as it consist of the 20 elected MLAs of the tribals out of 40 other elected MLAs of the non-tribals, therefore, in a democratic process, there is not much they can really do in the state assembly being minority.

On the other hand, development projects have also been one hurdle upon the tribals and their land. The introduction of developmental projects like the Khuga Dam and the constant talk of abolishing Chieftainship has put fear in the minds of the people that compensations paid for the area of land destroyed by such projects might not cover them. Therefore, the MLR&LR Act was welcomed in 69 villages of Churachandpur sub-division. But the very proposal of Khuga Dam as a developmental project has not benefitted the people in any sort of development other than providing an oceanic view and a picnic spot. Rather, is has submerged 1200 hectares of agriculture and homestead land. Conversely, the politics remains that the name of the project itself has been termed Khuga which is a Meitei language. Whenever a dam is constructed, it takes the name of the river; Khuga is the Meitei name for the River Tuitha which is the local name of the river in the place where the dam has been located. Though the dam stands in a tribal area, the name of the dam has been named after a Meitei language which is rather strange. The politics is that it might be useful in the future to claim that area by stating that even the name of the dam has been named after a Meitei name of the river which is rather intriguing. This sort of geo-politics has been played by the Manipuri non-tribals in order to expand their territory as they are valley dwellers and only about 10 per cent of the landmass of Manipur is valley and the rest is surrounded by Hills. Therefore, only 38.43 per cent of the state’s population is occupying about 90 per cent of the state’s land area and the majority valley dwellers are concentrating in 10 per cent of the land area which is leading to population explosion. This could suspiciously be the reason why the definition of Hill areas has been jeopardised under the power of the Official Gazette of the state. Similar instances like worshipping gods and goddesses in the hills have also been started lately by the non-tribals who have never been mountain dwellers in the history of their culture and tradition. The purpose of taking such initiatives could suspiciously be in the interest of claiming lands (tribal lands) as their ancestral lands in the future and expand their territory and seize them from the Hill Dwellers.

Looking from a bureaucratic point of view, the recent Oil Exploration projects have again put tribal land into a huge stake. Since the beginning of planning the project, the entire process was discreetly conspired by the state without the knowledge of the chiefs to whom the targeted areas belonged to. The process and conditions proposed here are rather similar to Section 158 (c) of the MLR&LR Act which has provided a special provision for non-tribals to enter tribal territories under the mask of co-operative societies under which, today, pockets of non-tribal localities are scattered today which were actually supposed to be co-operative societies lands and ethically upholding public interest. Similarly, the case of oil exploration has been orchestrated as a developmental project when there is nothing it is actually developing at all other than extracting the unexploited resources of the tribal lands and paying Royalty to the state while the lands belonged to the tribal chiefs. Sadly, the fact remains that a huge section of the tribal population is still with positive expectation out of this extraction process and it is rather fearful and doubtful at the same time that like the way the MLR&LR Act has been given an open door for want of private benefits and personal gains, the oil exploration project might gain an entry point and support under the same ground.

Indeed, the hill tracts of Manipur has been constantly under invasion from external agencies and as most of these threats are in the form of legal and bureaucratic policies, the complexity and politics behind these initiatives are misunderstood and misinterpreted by many. Nonetheless, with the system of traditional administration being vested under the chief, factors like illiteracy or ignorance can sway them easily into losing their land and power in exchange of petty offers, compensations and contracts. These conditions are hampering the conditions and sustainability of the villagers which impacts badly on the village structure. One important aspect to be remembered by the chefs is that their chieftainship is determined by their land and without their land, their power and authority has of meaning. Therefore, the role and responsibility vested in a chief is extremely fragile and critical in determining the sustainability of the tribal land structure.

While talking about external factors effecting the changing land relations among the Paite, it is also equally important to see how internal variations and factors are contributing in the process of changes in the land structure. Land alienation has been a buzz word to point at the state machineries; however, if we are to look into the real causes and consequences of land alienation, we have to consider deprivation of land aswell. In the country, caste issues and land issues have been closely linked together thereby implying that the simulation of caste based oppressions are due to derivations to access to land. The Scheduled Caste communities or the Dalits of the country have historically been deprived from any sort of land ownership. The concept of land being closely related to identity, the land less dalits have been deeply deprived and oppressed as untouchables and out caste under the caste structure.Dalitsare the outcast section of the society who faces all forms of oppression, exploitation, discrimination and suppression in society since time immemorial. They were in such a condition that they are not even treated as human beings and rights has been out of question, as they were excluded from the sanction provided by religion and all other man-made institutions in the society. They have been landless and were destined to be below everyone else, to serve them and to not attempt to rise up.

Land is a natural resource that is regarded as one of the most important when it comes to human existence and survival. In the economic sphere, it forms the primary factor of production. In fact, land is a basic thing in which many other resources are located and extracted. Land does not only give shelter and economic production but shapes the identity of man in a society. Identity is much associated with the place where one lives and thrives in a modern world and to survive in a settled address one needs to have the life-supporting system like land to produce his/her livelihood. Privatisation and commodification of land has made this process more difficult.

The tribal societies, specifically the Paites like many of the Hill Tribes of Manipur have, in this scenario, beautifully ensured the endowments and entitlements of each and every individual under the communitarian system of land and social stratification. Under the Paite customary practice, each and every individual has unrestricted access to land as an entitlement prior to the Chiefs. This has been the definition of their distinctive tradition and culture. However, with the rapid privatisation and commodification of land, the communitarian values of ownership and access have lost its value. Today, especially in Churachandpur, productive and agricultural lands are being rapidly sold out reducing the potential economic productivity of the region and at the same time privatising the ownership and access to land for those who can afford to pay.

This process under a development perspective can be termed as growth to some extent. It may also be more beneficial than being under the chief system as development projects will come and award compensations only to the chief while everyone is equally affected. It may even be safer as each and every household can legally own their houses and land without being disturbed by the chiefs who at times can be cruel and selfish.But, the fundamental characteristic of being a tribe comes along with their traditional entitlement to own and have access to land, without which, the basic essence of being a tribe is deeply challenged. Unlike the caste structure, the system here anyways is open to all, but is also intensely dependent of affordability and purchasing power which may not be the same among every individual though a tribal society. Therefore, the egalitarian tribal society is now vulnerable towards unequal access and ownership to land, which means, one very important and fundamental component of a communitarian and egalitarian culture is now transforming into a stratified community with demarcations made on the ground of the land owners and the landless. Therefore, the change in land relations will inevitably impact socially, economically and politically;

• Social impact: the difference in ownership of land in a tribal society will createa new form of stratification in the society between the land owners and the land less which in future could create a class of difference between the two.
• Economic impact: privatisation of productive agriculture lands will cease accessibility and productivity of the land and adversely impact on the economy of the community as well as impact on the livelihood support system of the landless farmers.
• Political impact: the transformation of community land into private lands can potentially hinder the self-identification of the Paite as an indigenous and distinct tribe as land is a crucial political entity in the process of political self-determination.

The safeguard of these three dimensions are extremely crucial to ensure the survival and sustainability of the Paite as a distinct tribe. The impact of growth and development should be regulated and redefined in a tribal (Paite) centred approach so that the culture and custom of the hill tribes will not be destroyed. Without preserving the virginity of the tribal land, their distinctive character will be jeopardised even possibly to an extent where their unique characteristics from the non-tribals will be fragmented. The equality in opportunity is the main uniqueness of the land system among the Paite and the Hill tribes. Unlike caste societies, the tribe society has opportunities equally for every one as everyone has equal access and entitlement to land. But, if privatisation of land is going to take place to an extent which is always open for those who can afford, then the scenario of tribal society will soon be in a different page.

Civil societies and local leaders must regulate this system of land ownership and privatisation in such a way that privatisation of land can also be equally distributed and community lands can also be preserved for the rear future so that the custom and culture of the community can be preserved. Also, for the safeguard of the chieftainship system, it is essential that the traditional systems of land holding are preserved. If not, the cases in the MLR&LR Act implemented areas, such as the chief owning proper control only over his plot of land, will soon be the case of the Hills and the villages aswell.

For instance, ZEPADA has upheld the system of Leasing out land to non-tribals, co-operatives and government agencies rather than selling them out. This is also a brilliant way of retaining original ownership and control over the land rather than selling them out. In the past, land area required for Army Camps, Government offices etc were sold out and the owners do not have the chance to get those lands back again. Had it been the lease system, then they would still have been the original owners.

The concept of leasing out is also more tribal centric as it is closely linked to the system of land use pattern under the chief in villages. In villages, every individual is entitled land but they are mostly the property of the chief. But the individual owns it as long as (s)he lives in the village. Likewise, in the lease system, a particular period of time is assigned for the usage of the land, during which the fees for the land is paid to its owner and after the time period is over, the land goes back to the original owner. In this way, the land ownership pattern and tradition of the Paite can be preserved.

Conclusion

The changing structure of land relations among the Paite tribes of Manipur has been but inevitable since the past few decades. In the process of safeguarding and further trying to retrieve their independence and freedom, not only land holding system but culture and tradition has also taken a different shape. The merger of Manipur and the inclusion of the Hill areas in the administration of Manipur has been the genesis of changes in land relations among the hill tribes. It was at this historical epoch that the administrative system of land and governance took a turning point, influenced and compelled by the introduction of democratic decentralisation, the traditional systems of governance under the chief began to lose its power and importance. Today, especially in churachandpur town, the power and jurisdiction of the Chiefs are pretty much suppressed and limited compared to their traditional entitlements. Processes like these are a matter of great concern but deliberately avoided by many due to their complexity and limited faith in the wrecked political bureaucracy of Manipur.

Changing land relations among the Paite tribes are therefore tossed between external as well as internal factors which are both changing the relationship of the inextricable linkages and relationships between the tribals, forest and land. While developmental programmes are masked to penetrate the protected tribal areas in the name of development; forest policies are limiting the freedom of the tribals access to forest lands and Wild Life Sanctuaries are advocating the existential rights of the suspiciously existing Tigers and wild animals at the cost of displacing the tribal communities residing peacefully in their own ancestral territories. On the other hand, internally, traditional land relations are being constantly challenged with the newly emerging groups of elites who are generously determined to invest in huge farms and farm houses as a property asset. This new trend is a recently immerging area of investment among the Paite community which can soon become an internal virus to the chieftainship institution as land is being siphoned off from the chief and without land the power of the chief is gone. With the decrease in the size of the land, the power and authority of the chief also decreases. Therefore, Chieftainship is defined by the land and that is why they are called Lords of the Soil, which implies, without the soil, the chief becomes the lord of nothing.

The criticality of the presence of the chieftainship institution is because it is the only institution which protects tribal land from the non tribals. Once the chieftainship institution is wiped away, the administration will totally be taken over by the Village Authority which is under the Autonomous District Council (ADC). The ADC on the other hand is like a Lion without its teeth because it has no financial resources. The Hill Area Committee which is constituted by the elected MLAs is also deprived of economic self-determination. Therefore, both the apex bodies of governance for the tribals which are the ADC and the HAC are still under the financial and democratic control of the state. Therefore, the without chieftainship, the hill areas, will be under the domination and control of the state, which is again dominated by the non-tribals.

Looking at the custom of the Meiteis, they have never been mountain dwellers. Had they ever been in the hills, they would have had temples of their gods and goddesses in the hills since their inception of Hinduisim. But there is none. Still, they deliberately compose stories and histories about their relation to hill areas and start climbing the Thangching Hills under the pretext of the presence of the gods which is presumably with the interest to claim those areas as their ancestral places. Due to population explosion in the valleys, the scope for development is limited. That is why the non-tribals are closing into the hills where 90 per cent of the state’s geography is concentrated and scarcely populated. But, constitutionally, hill areas are synonymous to tribal areas. The meiteis have attempted to interpret this meaning of hills based on geographical and bureaucratic interpretation rather than referring to the constitutional definition. Therefore, they are attempting to claim hills as areas above valleys and include them as valley areas. Therefore, based on their interpretation, the Khuga valley, though geographically a hill area, has been interpreted as the Khuga valley. Likewise, though Jiribam, Churachandpur and Sadar Hills are being populated by the tribals, they have been drifted under surveyed area. This is the kind of political sub-domination taking place upon the hill tribes of Manipur. Therefore, the hill tribes are constantly strapped within external and inter forces of suppression which are hindering their safety and security.

Besides all these reasons, due to the lack of proper infrastructure and social security in villages, large scale migration has been taking place. Few cases of migration are also linked to the unpleasant experiences with the chiefs. The political economy of migration does not end here. Migration from a village transforms that individual from a land owner to a land less individual. This creation of landlessness is a process of destitution as land is the basic economic source of livelihood and without it,the individual becomes socially, economically and politically powerless.

The changing pattern of land structure in the Paite community has been vast. The values of communitarianism have been greatly contested by the whims of privatisation. On the other hand, state sponsored bureaucratic strategies are crucial to be studied and understood further so that the custom, tradition and integrity of a tribal community will not get dissolved under the modernising and developing culture. Democratisation and decentralisation of power needs to be cautiously understood before these institutions take over the age old tribal system of local governance.

The most essential aspect is that tribals should be given the liberty to determine the process of their own growth and development rather than offering them modernisation and development which are borrowed from a non-tribal context. The epistemological premise of the tribal culture is deeply rooted into land. Land is central and fundamental in the aspects in determining a tribal identity. Therefore, the changing land relations among the tribal communities are inversely changing their identity aswell. The entire processes of land alienations, internal and external, are a huge threat to the Paite tribe as well as the entire hill tribes as they transform their characteristics as a tribal.

References

A.K. Ray and KamkhenthangH.. 1997. ‘District Councils in Manipur visa-a-vis Sixth Schedule’ in L.S. Gassah(eds) Autonomous District Councils, Omsons Publications, Delhi,

Arora V &Kipgen N.(2012). ‘We can live without power, but we can’t live withoutour land’: Indigenous Hmar Oppose the Tipaimukh Dam in Manipur. Sociological Bulletin, 61 (1), 109-128.

Basu, N. G. 1987.Forest and Tribals. Calcutta: Manish Granthalaya

Bijoy C.R., Gopalakrishnan S, &Khanna S. (2010).India and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.AIPP Thailand.

COPTAM 2012.Brief Note on Tribal Land Issue. Zogam.com. Retrieved on 23 rd February 2013 from

www.zogam.com/…/279-coptam-brief-notes-on-tribal-land-issue

Daimai, K.. 2011. ‘Tribal forest and its implementation in Manipur’. The Sangai Express, April 14, 2011

Decentralisation And Governance. Decentralisation, GovernaceAnd The Institutional Framework Of Development In Different Regions Of Manipur. Retrieved on 10 th January 2013 at

http://manipur.nic.in/planning/DraftMSDR/Draft_SDR_pdf/Chapter%2018_Decentralisation.pdf

Devi P.B. 2006. Tribal Land System OfManipurAkansha Publishing House, New Delhi.

Elwin, V 1954 The Tribal Myths of Orissa. Bombay: Oxford University Press.

Fernandes, W. 1993 “Forest And Tribals: Informal Economy, Dependence and Management Tradition”, (pp. 48-69), in M. Miri (ed.). Continuity and Change in Tribal Society. Shimla: IIAS

Fernandes, W &Pereira, M. 2005.Land Relations and Ethnic Conflicts: The Case of North Eastern India. North Eastern Research Centre. Assam.

Gangte T.S. 2005. The Kukis of Manipur, Gyan Publishing House, Delhi.

Hembram, P. C 1988.Sari-Sarna. New Delhi: Mittal Publications

Hoffman, J 1950.EncyclopediaMundaris. Patna: Superintendent Government Press

Jubilant Energy Manipur Blocks (AA-ONN-2009/1 and AA-ONN-2009/2) http://www.jubilantenergy.com/pages.php?page_id=21 as on 16 th Sept. 2012.

Laldena 2009. Key note presentation on “Atrocities on Lands of the tribals” at the Seminar-cum-Training on SC and ST on Presentation of Atrocities Act, 1989, Organised by the Manipur Tribal Council, MTC in collaboration with Tribal Research Institute (TRI) on 26-27 June, 2009, held at Synod Hall, IB Road, Churachandpur, Manipur.

LokendraN.. 2005. L and Use System in Manipur Hills. Rajesh Publication, New Delhi

Manipur Pollution Control Board Notice No. PCB/303/03-04/Vol-II(DEW). In the matters of Public Hearing for the Proposed Exploratory Drilling and Allied Activities by Jubilant Oil & Gas Pvt.Ltd., Noida (UP).Retrieved on 12 th Sept 2012

Manipur Gazette, 2008. Extraordinary: The Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Third Amendment) Act, 2008. Published by Authority.

Government of Manipur. 1967. The Manipur Hill Areas (Acquisition of Chiefs Rights) Act, 1967. Supdt.Ptg. &Sty.Manipur. /C-350/20-6-67.

Government of Manipur, DIPR. 1989. Importance of survey and preparation of land Recrds& extension of the provisions of MLR&LR Act ,1960 to Hill Areas. Imphal.

Manipur Administration No. 306-E-259. 1962. Notification orders by Chief Commissioner. Imphal.

Ngaihte, L.C. 1998. Tribal Agrarian System of Manipur, a Study of Zomi. Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.

Notice Inviting Offers for Exploration of Oil and Natural Gas Under New Exploration Licensing Policy Eight Round (NELP VIII). Joint Secretary of the Government of India.Ministry of Petrolium and Natural Gas. 9 th April 2009. (Retrieved from http://petroleum.nic.in/nio8.pdf as on 15th Sept. 2012).

Planning Commission of India: (Accessed 2011) http://planningmanipur.gov.in/pdf/MSDR/Chapter%2017_Land%20Rights%20Autonomy.pdf

Patel, M. L. 1974. “Changing Land Problems of Tribal India”.Progress Publishers, Bhopal.

Roy Burman, B. K. 1988. “Development of Forestry in Harmony with the Interest of The Tribals”, Background paper for Indian Forest Service Training Programme at TISS, Bombay, Nov. 21-26

Sanga R. Effects of the Extension of MLR & LR Act, 1960.To the Hill Areas of Manipur – Protection of Tribal Land. Retrieved on 20 th Sept, 2012 from

http://www.zogamonline.com/columns/r-sanga/6251-qimpact-on-extension-of-mlr-a-lr-act-protection-of-tribal-landq.html

Sanga, R. 2012. Legal and Constitutional Aspects. The Second Consultative Meeting On Tribal Rights And Issues In Manipur.

Sanga, R. 2012. Customary law and cultural rights.Presented on the training programme on UNDRIP training session on August 23-25, 2012 at Synod Hall, IB Road, Lamka, Churachandpur, Manipur.

Thang, H.K. 1988. Paite: A Transborder tribe of India and Burma. K.M Mittal for Mittal Publications. Delhi.

The Manipur Merger Agreement. 1949. Signed by the designations of Bodha Chandra Singh, the Maharaja of Manipur; V.P.Menon, Adviser of the Government of India and Sri Prakash, the Governr of Assam on September 21, 1949.

The Manipur (Village Authorities in Hill Areas) (Amendment) Act, 2011.

Yumnam A. 2002. ‘Traditional Self Government Institutions of Hill Tribes of Manipur’. In AtulGoswami (eds), Traditional Self Government Institutions Amongst Hill Tribes of North East India, Akanksha Publishing House, Delhi.

31 Production Sharing Contracts signed under NELP-VIII on 30 June 2010

(Retrieved from http://www.dghindia.org/nelp.aspx as on 15 th Sept 2012)

END NOTES

An armed outfit representing the Zomi Tribes.

Committee On Protection of Tribal Areas, Manipur

An association of Chiefs from different villages formed to protect the interest of the Chieftainship Institution.

Locally used to refer to good jobs.

Sub-Divisional Office:- Sub Divisional secretariat operating in different sub-divisions.

HAC is constituted by the elected representatives of the tribals in the state assembly.

Published by DIPR, Government of Manipur.

The areas in the Hill Tracts of the Union Territory of Manipur declared to be Hill Areas under Clause (J) of section 2 of the MLR&LR Act 1960.

A tract or tracts of land in the hill areas held by a chief under a boundary paper or grant issued or made by a competent authority or under or in accordance with any law for the time being in force.

Buhsun-Payable to a chief by any person in cash or in kind or in labor in respect of land or homestead in a village

Also known as Vuite Road. It has been used since the British period in AD 1930. Starts from Singngat and extends till Sinzawl village.

Zomi Economic Planning and Development Agency: a non-governmental, non-political, non-profit making organization established by leaders of the Zomi ethnic groups of India for holistic socio-economic development of the people mainly focusing on rural and tribal development.

A legal document issued by the government of Manipur under MLR&LR Act 1060 to recognize that a certain plot of land (Surveyed Land) belongs to that individual whose name is written in the document.

Referring to the state of Sikkim