The Manipur High Court has now admitted a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the International Meeteis Forum (IMF) that seeks to “quash” the fact-finding report published by the Editors’ Guild of India on the ethnic violence in the State. The PIL also requested for directions barring the use of the said report by any authority or agency looking into the conflict, alleging a nexus between the EGI and “narco-terrorist groups”.
A Bench of Acting Chief Justice M.V. Muralidaran and Justice Ahanthem Bimol Singh on Thursday admitted the PIL and issued notices to all respondents, posting the matter for next hearing on October 12. The EGI and its members have been given four weeks to file their response even as the Deputy Solicitor General accepted the notices on behalf of the Union and State governments.
The IMF, which has filed various PILs in the Manipur High Court since the ethnic conflict began on May 3, in its most recent one, has marked the Centre, the State government, the Editors’ Guild of India, the All Manipur Working Journalists’ Union (AMWJU) and the three members of EGI who visited the State for their report.
The report was published by the EGI on September 2 after it sent a team to look into a complaint from the Indian Army about misinformation being spread in the State. The report concluded that the Meitei-dominant press in Imphal had allegedly fanned the ethnic violence by publishing misinformation that favoured the Meitei community. It drew sharp reactions from journalists’ unions based in Imphal, who said that the report was riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations.
An FIR was also registered against members of the EGI by the Manipur Police, based on the complaint of a “social worker” and Chief Minister N. Biren Singh called the report “one sided”, further accusing EGI members of trying to provoke clashes in a press conference.
While the EGI has already approached the Supreme Court for protection in this FIR, the IMF has now approached the High Court with a plea to stop the report from being cited or used in any inquiries related to the ethnic clashes.
The petitioners argued that the Indian Army had “exceeded its jurisdiction” by sending the complaint to the EGI as their duty is to only “aid the civil administration of the State in this hour of need”. Further, the IMF claimed that the EGI too exceeded its jurisdiction by acting on the said complaint “by hoodwinking all stakeholders including the State Government and the local journalists”.
The IMF, in their petition, pointed towards six instances of alleged “false and baseless” information in the EGI report, one of which was admitted by the EGI as an error in captioning an image.
The petitioners added that the report had “illegally” depicted the state government led by Meiteis as “anti-Kuki” in an “attempt to make sure” that Kuki people “hate and attack” Meitei community leaders, including ones in the State government. The IMF blamed the report’s publication for the hatred between the two communities escalating.
While a Bench comprising the Acting Chief Justice admitted this PIL on Thursday, it adjourned the hearing in the appeals to the March 27 ST status order till Friday.
