Formation of districts : Administrative convenience or inconvenience ?
|
Birendra Laishram
Manipur had been grappling with a series of strikes and blockades initiated by the Kuki community, which advocated for recognizing the Sadar Hills (SH) area, located in Senapati district, as a fully-fledged revenue district. The persistent demands from the Kuki community for improved administrative organization and recognition have been consistently overlooked by political leaders in Manipur, leading to escalating tensions and conflicts with other communities in the region. Since the establishment of Manipur as a State in 1972, there has been no Governmental initiative to elevate Sadar Hills to district status. Efforts made in the past, such as those initiated by Rishang Keishing’s Congress Government back in 1982, were thwarted by the opposition from the Manipur Naga Council, and subsequent attempts by various administrations have also met with failure.
In a notable instance, W Nipamacha Singh’s Government had intentions to officially inaugurate Sadar Hills as a revenue district in October 1997, with all necessary infrastructure already in place to support this transition. However, despite these plans, the Government ultimately chose not to move forward with the decision. The Naga community, at the right time, gave voice with strong opposition to the creation of the Kangpokpi district, asserting that they were the original settlers of the area and perceiving the Kukis as newcomers who do not have legitimate claims to the land. It is crucial to recognize, however, that the ethnic groups residing in North East India, which include the Meitei and Tangkhul-Naga communities, have migrated over time, and Khongjai migrated afterwards. No one in this universe is incubated at the places where they are living now. They must have been coming from one place or another. Man is a social animal and happy living in the community. The word “ETHNIC” is not an original word sounded by the primitives. A certain measuring tap must be there to keep apart the status of settlers; thus, no group can claim permanent establishment in their current locations without consideration of historical movements based on comprehensive historical records, particularly those that reference significant years such as 1961 and 1951.
Regarding the formation of a new district as Kangpokpi under Sadar Hills leads to important questions about what constitutes administrative convenience in the context of district formation: Are there sufficient hospitals, high schools, colleges, roads, and administrative offices available in Sadar Hills ? Has the State Government invested in building a proper road network to facilitate access to Sadar Hills ? Currently, there are no adequate administrative facilities in the proposed new district except in the Kangpokpi Head Quarters, which raises concerns about the feasibility of such a move from the people who live in far-flung areas at the periphery of district boundaries.
Whether the State Government has constructed 85 km long roads from the southern part of SH to the northern part of SH, where the district headquarters is located or not been constructed ? Then, go to the south-eastern part of SH and see the conveniences of going to Kangpokpi. There was/is no Administrative convenience in the formation of a new district in SH. The State Government just copied the areas that fall under the demarcation done by the colonial rulers in the year 1933; all the areas are the hills overlooking and encircling Imphal valley. Whose convenience is it ? There was and still is no point of convenience, especially in the formation of the new district of Kangpokpi. A CM who could not see even a little further upgraded Kangpokpi as a district in the year 2016, misinformed the people that the upgrade was based on administrative convenience. The ongoing conflicts and clashes that are occurring between the Meitei and Kuki communities were acknowledged by previous Chief Ministers of the State; hence, they postponed the formation of Kangpokpi district. However, it is important to note that the then Chief Minister of 2016 did not take the necessary steps to address or resolve these issues recognized by his predecessors. This lack of action and more actions in the formation of new districts has contributed to the current tensions between the two groups. While I do not oppose the Government’s policies in principle, I am critical of the push to create Kangpokpi district without the necessary infrastructure firmly in place, depriving the facilities meant for the people of the district. I firmly support the formation of a new district only when essential facilities are guaranteed to ensure accessibility and public benefit for all residents. Therefore, the proposed district formation warrants a thorough re-evaluation, particularly in light of the misleading justifications that have been provided thus far.
It is important to recognize that Manipur is a relatively small, economically disadvantaged State that relies heavily on support from the Central Government for its functioning and development. The proposal to increase the number of administrative districts raises significant concerns regarding the associated costs, which can be disproportionately high; for instance, moving from nine to sixteen districts represents a staggering 77.78% increase in administrative expenses without delivering tangible benefits for the residents. This situation can be interpreted as a misrepresentation of the concept of convenience, as it does not necessarily translate into improved governance or services for the people.
Furthermore, granting full district status to Sadar Hills poses a risk of exacerbating mistrust and animosity between the Kukis and the Meitei communities. Traditionally, the establishment of districts in Manipur has been based on considerations of administrative convenience and developmental needs rather than on ethnic divisions or communal interests. However, the creation of Kangpokpi district appears to be heavily influenced by these very communal interests, which raises questions about the motivations behind such a move.
The Kukis, who have historically been nomadic people, are now seeking land ownership as they navigate a political environment that is often characterized by corruption and inefficiency. This quest for land ownership has led them to encroach upon vulnerable areas of the State, creating a situation that is troubling and fraught with challenges. The silence from authorities in response to these encroachments is particularly concerning, as it suggests a disregard for Constitutional principles and a lack of accountability, leaving the Kukis and other communities feeling margi-nalized and unsupported.
In light of these complexities, the pressing need of the hour is to foster and promote harmonious coexistence among all ethnic communities in Manipur. We must move away from district formations that are based solely on ethnic divisions and instead work towards a more inclusive approach that recognizes the diverse histories and contributions of all communities in the region. By doing so, we can hope to build a more united and equitable Manipur for all its residents.
Manipur had been grappling with a series of strikes and blockades initiated by the Kuki community, which advocated for recognizing the Sadar Hills (SH) area, located in Senapati district, as a fully-fledged revenue district. The persistent demands from the Kuki community for improved administrative organization and recognition have been consistently overlooked by political leaders in Manipur, leading to escalating tensions and conflicts with other communities in the region. Since the establishment of Manipur as a State in 1972, there has been no Governmental initiative to elevate Sadar Hills to district status. Efforts made in the past, such as those initiated by Rishang Keishing’s Congress Government back in 1982, were thwarted by the opposition from the Manipur Naga Council, and subsequent attempts by various administrations have also met with failure.
In a notable instance, W Nipamacha Singh’s Government had intentions to officially inaugurate Sadar Hills as a revenue district in October 1997, with all necessary infrastructure already in place to support this transition. However, despite these plans, the Government ultimately chose not to move forward with the decision. The Naga community, at the right time, gave voice with strong opposition to the creation of the Kangpokpi district, asserting that they were the original settlers of the area and perceiving the Kukis as newcomers who do not have legitimate claims to the land. It is crucial to recognize, however, that the ethnic groups residing in North East India, which include the Meitei and Tangkhul-Naga communities, have migrated over time, and Khongjai migrated afterwards. No one in this universe is incubated at the places where they are living now. They must have been coming from one place or another. Man is a social animal and happy living in the community. The word “ETHNIC” is not an original word sounded by the primitives. A certain measuring tap must be there to keep apart the status of settlers; thus, no group can claim permanent establishment in their current locations without consideration of historical movements based on comprehensive historical records, particularly those that reference significant years such as 1961 and 1951.
Regarding the formation of a new district as Kangpokpi under Sadar Hills leads to important questions about what constitutes administrative convenience in the context of district formation: Are there sufficient hospitals, high schools, colleges, roads, and administrative offices available in Sadar Hills ? Has the State Government invested in building a proper road network to facilitate access to Sadar Hills ? Currently, there are no adequate administrative facilities in the proposed new district except in the Kangpokpi Head Quarters, which raises concerns about the feasibility of such a move from the people who live in far-flung areas at the periphery of district boundaries.
Whether the State Government has constructed 85 km long roads from the southern part of SH to the northern part of SH, where the district headquarters is located or not been constructed ? Then, go to the south-eastern part of SH and see the conveniences of going to Kangpokpi. There was/is no Administrative convenience in the formation of a new district in SH. The State Government just copied the areas that fall under the demarcation done by the colonial rulers in the year 1933; all the areas are the hills overlooking and encircling Imphal valley. Whose convenience is it ? There was and still is no point of convenience, especially in the formation of the new district of Kangpokpi. A CM who could not see even a little further upgraded Kangpokpi as a district in the year 2016, misinformed the people that the upgrade was based on administrative convenience. The ongoing conflicts and clashes that are occurring between the Meitei and Kuki communities were acknowledged by previous Chief Ministers of the State; hence, they postponed the formation of Kangpokpi district. However, it is important to note that the then Chief Minister of 2016 did not take the necessary steps to address or resolve these issues recognized by his predecessors. This lack of action and more actions in the formation of new districts has contributed to the current tensions between the two groups. While I do not oppose the Government’s policies in principle, I am critical of the push to create Kangpokpi district without the necessary infrastructure firmly in place, depriving the facilities meant for the people of the district. I firmly support the formation of a new district only when essential facilities are guaranteed to ensure accessibility and public benefit for all residents. Therefore, the proposed district formation warrants a thorough re-evaluation, particularly in light of the misleading justifications that have been provided thus far.
It is important to recognize that Manipur is a relatively small, economically disadvantaged State that relies heavily on support from the Central Government for its functioning and development. The proposal to increase the number of administrative districts raises significant concerns regarding the associated costs, which can be disproportionately high; for instance, moving from nine to sixteen districts represents a staggering 77.78% increase in administrative expenses without delivering tangible benefits for the residents. This situation can be interpreted as a misrepresentation of the concept of convenience, as it does not necessarily translate into improved governance or services for the people.
Furthermore, granting full district status to Sadar Hills poses a risk of exacerbating mistrust and animosity between the Kukis and the Meitei communities. Traditionally, the establishment of districts in Manipur has been based on considerations of administrative convenience and developmental needs rather than on ethnic divisions or communal interests. However, the creation of Kangpokpi district appears to be heavily influenced by these very communal interests, which raises questions about the motivations behind such a move.
The Kukis, who have historically been nomadic people, are now seeking land ownership as they navigate a political environment that is often characterized by corruption and inefficiency. This quest for land ownership has led them to encroach upon vulnerable areas of the State, creating a situation that is troubling and fraught with challenges. The silence from authorities in response to these encroachments is particularly concerning, as it suggests a disregard for Constitutional principles and a lack of accountability, leaving the Kukis and other communities feeling margi-nalized and unsupported.
In light of these complexities, the pressing need of the hour is to foster and promote harmonious coexistence among all ethnic communities in Manipur. We must move away from district formations that are based solely on ethnic divisions and instead work towards a more inclusive approach that recognizes the diverse histories and contributions of all communities in the region. By doing so, we can hope to build a more united and equitable Manipur for all its residents.