Central to this crisis was the looting of state armouries and the empowerment of militias such as Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun, which transformed localised protests into a full-blown conflict. The Tribunal highlights sharp disparities in relief and rehabilitation between valley-based Meitei camps and tribal camps in the hills, deepening inequality and resentment. It exposes the intimidation of media, manipulation of information, and prolonged internet shutdowns, which deprived citizens of accurate reporting and curtailed accountability. Sexual violence was deployed as a weapon of war, yet survivors continue to face barriers in accessing justice.

The IPT prescribes urgent corrective measures. It recommends the establishment of a Supreme Court–monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate crimes, an audit of weapons looted from armouries, and the publication of all reports of the Gita Mittal Committee and the Justice Ajai Lamba Commission. It calls for survivor-centric justice mechanisms, equitable relief and rehabilitation, reintegration of the health workforce, disarmament of militias, and the creation of a peacebuilding architecture rooted in dialogue, reparations, and truth-telling. This report is both a condemnation of state complicity and paralysis, and a roadmap for rebuilding constitutional order in Manipur.

Background and mandate of the Tribunal

The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), alarmed by the scale and persistence of violence in Manipur, constituted the Independent People’s Tribunal in March 2024. The Tribunal was conceived as a people’s forum of accountability in response to the limitations of official commissions of inquiry. Its mandate was broad: to document rights violations, examine the role of state and non-state actors, identify systemic failures, and propose remedial measures consistent with constitutional principles.

The jury included some of India’s most respected jurists and administrators: Justice Kurian Joseph (former Supreme Court judge), Justice K. Kannan (former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge), and Justice Anjana Prakash (former Patna High Court judge). They were joined by senior bureaucrats, academics, activists, and experts in public health, gender studies, law, and conflict resolution. This multidisciplinary composition ensured that the Tribunal’s findings combined legal scrutiny, social analysis, and humanitarian perspective.

The Tribunal’s authority rested not on statutory powers but on moral legitimacy, independence, and its ability to centre the experiences of survivors. It deliberately sought to amplify voices that had been marginalised in official narratives, particularly those of displaced communities, women survivors of violence, and minority groups.

Methodology

The Tribunal undertook an extensive process of documentation. Between May and June 2024, jury members and experts spent nearly two weeks in Manipur, visiting affected districts, relief camps, and conflict-affected villages. They met survivors across communities—Meitei, Kuki-Zo, Naga, and Pangal—as well as service providers, lawyers, doctors, journalists, public officials, and security personnel.

The Tribunal held follow-up sittings in Delhi and conducted virtual hearings through September 2024. It reviewed hundreds of pages of affidavits, photographs, video evidence, and documents submitted by survivors, civil society organisations, and independent observers. The process was marked by careful triangulation: testimonies were cross-verified with documentary evidence and field observations.

The Tribunal faced limitations inherent to a conflict setting. Severe polarisation and mistrust made testimony collection difficult. Many survivors were reluctant to speak openly due to threats or fear of reprisals. Journalists faced intimidation, and access to certain districts was restricted by security blockades. Despite these obstacles, the Tribunal’s findings rest on a robust evidentiary base, ensuring credibility and accuracy.

Historical and political context

Manipur is an ethnically diverse state with deep-seated historical grievances. The Meiteis constitute approximately 53% of the population and are concentrated in the valley. The Kukis, Zos, and Nagas make up a significant share of the hill population, with the Nagas around 24% and Kukis and Zos around 16%. While the Nagas were not a direct party to the conflict, they too were affected by its fallout.

The immediate trigger of the violence was the March 27, 2023 order of the Manipur High Court, directing the state to recommend Scheduled Tribe (ST) status for the Meiteis. This decision was perceived by tribal groups as a direct threat to their rights over land and resources, since ST status would enable Meiteis to purchase land in the hills. In response, tribal organisations organised a solidarity march on May 3, 2023. The march was peaceful until rumours and orchestrated provocations turned it into large-scale violence.

The Tribunal notes that this was not an isolated communal clash but a conflict shaped by three distinctive factors: first, the politicisation of the state apparatus, which failed to act neutrally; second, the rise of non-state militias like Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun, which carried out targeted campaigns of violence; and third, the looting of state armouries, which gave armed groups access to modern weaponry. These factors combined to transform temporary clashes into systemic violence and ethnic cleansing.

Patterns of violence

The Tribunal found overwhelming evidence that the violence was orchestrated rather than spontaneous. Militias such as Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun mobilised youth, armed them with looted weapons, and coordinated attacks. These groups suppressed dissent within their own communities, enforcing ethnic conformity through intimidation.

Repeated raids on state armouries between May 2023 and 2024 supplied militias with automatic rifles, machine guns, and explosives. These weapons were deployed in assaults on villages, churches, and civilian populations. The Tribunal highlights that the failure to prevent armoury raids, despite the deployment of large numbers of security personnel, reflects systemic complicity or negligence.

Religious persecution was a defining feature of the violence. Over 250 churches were destroyed or desecrated, particularly in the valley. Survivors recounted the burning of places of worship, desecration of sacred objects, and threats directed at pastors and priests. The Tribunal interprets these attacks as deliberate attempts to erase minority identities.

By late 2024, the violence had created stark ethnic segregation. Kukis and Zos had been expelled from the valley, while Meiteis had been driven out of the hills. The state was effectively divided into ethnic enclaves, with movement between districts restricted and controlled by informal ethnic borders.

Humanitarian impact

The human toll has been catastrophic. Around 260 people were killed, and between 50,000 and 60,000 were displaced. Displaced families were forced into more than 350 relief camps scattered across the state. These camps varied in quality: valley-based camps, predominantly housing Meiteis, received relatively better facilities, while tribal camps in the hills were overcrowded and under-resourced.

Survivors in tribal camps reported inadequate shelter, poor sanitation, scarcity of food supplies, and limited access to healthcare and education. Children faced prolonged disruption of schooling, and women bore disproportionate burdens of care. Many camps, originally conceived as temporary, have now become semi-permanent, deepening despair among displaced populations. The Tribunal stresses that the absence of a comprehensive rehabilitation plan has entrenched displacement as a permanent condition.

Gender-based violence

Gender-based violence emerged as a weapon of war in this conflict. The Tribunal documented dozens of cases of sexual violence across communities, although the true scale is likely far higher. Survivors testified to gang rapes, sexual assault during displacement, and threats of sexual violence used as a form of intimidation.

Justice mechanisms failed survivors. FIRs were delayed or not registered, medico-legal examinations were denied or improperly conducted, and survivor protection measures were absent. The Tribunal emphasises that accountability must go beyond individual perpetrators. Command responsibility must be established, holding state officials and militia leaders accountable for enabling or failing to prevent sexual violence. Fast-track courts and survivor-centred justice frameworks are urgently required.

Health and mental health crisis

The conflict devastated Manipur’s health system. Hospitals became inaccessible to communities displaced across ethnic lines. Tribal survivors reported being turned away from valley hospitals out of fear or hostility, while Meitei patients avoided hill hospitals. This led to preventable deaths from untreated conditions.

Mental health needs were acute. Survivors described chronic anxiety, nightmares, and depression, while journalists and aid workers also exhibited signs of trauma. With no dedicated trauma-care infrastructure, the psychological scars of the violence remain untreated. The Tribunal recommends reintegration of health services across ethnic divides, the establishment of trauma-informed care protocols, and the embedding of mental health services in relief camps.

Media and information disorder

The conflict was aggravated by information disorder. Local media often adopted partisan narratives, depicting Kuki-Zo communities as “illegal immigrants.” This framing was dangerous and misleading, given the absence of a refugee law in India and the complex citizenship histories of borderland populations.

Journalists who sought to report independently faced intimidation, arrests, and smear campaigns. The state repeatedly suspended internet access, cutting off communities from communication and depriving journalists of vital tools. Harsh laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act were used to suppress dissent. The Tribunal concludes that such practices not only undermined accountability but also enabled violence to spread unchecked.

Case Study: Jiribam, November 2024

The Tribunal highlights Jiribam as a microcosm of the conflict. In November 2024, the killing of two men, the gang rape of a Hmar schoolteacher, and the disappearance of a Meitei family sparked retaliatory violence. The CRPF’s killing of ten Kuki insurgents further escalated tensions. Retaliatory attacks targeted Meitei farmland and houses, deepening displacement and undermining food security.

The Jiribam case illustrates how tit-for-tat dynamics operate in the absence of credible law enforcement. Each incident triggered counter-violence, fuelling a cycle of retaliation. The state’s inability to protect citizens or prosecute perpetrators ensured that impunity became the norm.

State and institutional response

The Tribunal is unequivocal in its conclusion that the State of Manipur failed to uphold constitutional governance. Despite the deployment of over 100,000 security personnel, the state failed to prevent the looting of armouries, protect vulnerable communities, or restore normalcy. Survivors consistently questioned the neutrality of the police and administration, alleging partisan conduct.

The Justice Ajai Lamba Commission and the Gita Mittal Committee were constituted to investigate aspects of the conflict. However, their reports remain unpublished or only partially disclosed, undermining transparency and accountability. The state has also failed to announce any credible plan for rehabilitation, safe return, or reconciliation, leaving displaced populations in limbo.

Risk outlook

The Tribunal warns of two interconnected risks. First, the prolonged residence of IDPs in camps risks cementing ethnic segregation into a permanent reality. Without structured plans for return and rehabilitation, displacement will harden into apartheid-like separation. Second, the continued availability of looted arms and the empowerment of militias sustain the potential for renewed violence. Without disarmament and accountability, Manipur will remain a tinderbox vulnerable to fresh outbreaks.

Recommendations of the Tribunal

The Tribunal’s recommendations span multiple domains. It calls for a Supreme Court–monitored SIT to investigate crimes, supported by witness protection schemes and independent prosecution units. It urges the publication of all reports of the Gita Mittal Committee and the Justice Ajai Lamba Commission. It recommends fast-track courts for conflict-related crimes, especially sexual violence cases.

In terms of relief, the Tribunal calls for a judicially monitored Special Committee to survey camp needs, ensure equitable resource distribution, and prepare time-bound rehabilitation plans. It stresses the importance of reintegrating health services across ethnic lines, embedding trauma care, and protecting mental health. It also insists on an audit of all weapons looted from armouries, the recovery of arms, and the disarmament of militias.

For peacebuilding, the Tribunal recommends inclusive dialogue forums involving women, youth, and faith leaders, truth-telling initiatives, reparations, and the establishment of a National Peace Commission. It proposes the creation of a Manipur Peace Index to monitor progress. In the media domain, it calls for the end of blanket internet shutdowns, protection of journalists, and active monitoring of hate speech. Land and livelihood disputes must be addressed through impartial tribunals and transparent development policies.

Implementation timeline

The Tribunal outlines a phased roadmap. Within 30 days, the Supreme Court should establish an SIT, the state must initiate camp surveys and weapons audits, and all commission reports should be made public. Within 90 days, fast-track courts must begin operations, indictments should be filed in emblematic cases, and healthcare reintegration pilots launched. Within six to twelve months, displaced populations must begin safe return, truth-telling forums must commence, and the first Manipur Peace Index should be published.

Conclusion

The Independent People’s Tribunal provides a damning indictment of governance failure in Manipur. It documents how state institutions enabled impunity, allowed militias to flourish, and abandoned vulnerable communities. At the same time, it provides a roadmap for recovery grounded in constitutional values, transitional justice, and comparative experiences from global conflicts. Unless corrective measures are taken swiftly, Manipur risks becoming a permanently divided society, where segregation and violence replace democracy and rule of law. The urgency of implementation cannot be overstated.

The complete report may be read below.

Related:

Manipur 2023: Violence unaddressed eight months after conflicts erupt

Snapshot of Manipur Govt’s coercive actions against citizens: 2023

When the Manipur High Court stepped in

How and when the Supreme Court moved on Manipur: 2023

The post Broken State, Divided People: PUCL releases report of Independent People’s Tribunal on Manipur appeared first on SabrangIndia.