Did MLAs Defy Government Policy? The Indigenous Pillar Controversy Deepens Over MLAs Involvement
(How MLAs Involved in the Erection of a Controversial Indigenous Pillar by an Organisation — Even Offering Financial Support?)
The erection of an “Indigenous Pillar” at Sawombung by an organisation called the Federation of Haome (FoH) has sparked widespread outrage in Manipur. The pillar, unveiled on October 6, 2025, identifies 25 ethnic groups as indigenous, excluding the Meitei Pangal and 8 recognised Scheduled Tribes.
This classification stands in direct contradiction to the Inner Line Permit (Amendment) Rules, 2022, framed under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873, which officially recognises three indigenous categories in Manipur:Meitei,Meitei Pangal,Recognised Scheduled Tribes comprising 33 tribes under Article 342(1) of the Indian Constitution.
Several civil society organisations of the Meitei Pangal community have denounced and rejected the Indigenous Pillar, calling it divisive and unconstitutional. Similarly, the Thadou Students’ Association stated that the pillar does not represent any legally recognised classification of Manipur’s indigenous groups.
Netizens from across communities have also strongly criticised the unveiling, claiming that it promotes exclusionary politics and seeks to divide Manipur’s ethnic communities by asserting ownership of the land solely in the name of “indigenous people.”
MLAs’ Reported Involvement Raises Questions
What has shocked many is the reported involvement of some MLAs in the erection of the controversial Indigenous Pillar by the Federation of Haome. Three MLAs are Thongam Shanti (Moirang AC), Karam Shyam (Langthabal AC), and Th. Ibomcha (Lamlai AC) were seen participating in a tree plantation programme held at the Indigenous Pillar complex at Sawombung Kabui Khuljao on April 21, 2025.
In a press release dated April 26, 2025, the Federation of Haome publicly expressed its gratitude to several individuals, including four MLAs, Thongam Shanti, Karam Shyam, Th. Ibomcha, and Khashi Vashum (Chingai AC) for their financial, physical, and moral support. This information has been widely reported across print, electronic, and digital media in Manipur.
Contradicting Government Policy?
The larger question remains: How could ruling MLAs openly support an initiative that contradicts the Manipur government’s own ILP (Amendment) Rules, 2022? Are these MLAs opposing the inclusion of Meitei Pangal and the eight Scheduled Tribes in the list of officially recognised indigenous groups? Are they engaging in appeasement politics without understanding the sensitive ethnic dynamics of the state? Or is this simply an act of political opportunism aimed at confusing communities and undermining state policy?
Such actions,undermine the legitimacy of the State and its institutions, especially when the ILP rules are a part of the constitutional framework of Manipur.
The four MLAs concerned must clarify their stand before the people of Manipur. The public has every right to know where their elected representatives stand on an issue that directly concerns the unity, legality, and integrity of the State.