Manipur MP seeks clarity on ‘buffer zone’ through RTI

Lok Sabha MP from Manipur Angomcha Bimol Akoijam on Thursday sought clarity on whether the concept of a “buffer zone” legally exists in Manipur and under what law or authority it has been enforced, in a Right to Information (RTI) application filed with the Union home ministry.
The Congress MP sought the clarity on the concept of a buffer zone in the backdrop of recent incident in which he (the MP) was denied access to a village at Bishnupur-Churachandpur inter-district border where multiple blasts were set off on January 5 morning, leaving two persons, including a woman,with splinter injuries. The MP raised serious concerns over the alleged demarcation of buffer zones while asserting that the declaration of buffer zones has caused serious hardships to internally displaced persons (IDPs), preventing them from returning to their homes.
He questioned whether such restrictions are permissible under Indian law while talking to reporters on the sideline of an event in Imphal on Thursday .
“Under which law of the Indian Constitution has the imposition of buffer zones been undertaken,” Dr Akoijam asked. He called upon the people to join him in uncovering the truth behind the existence and enforcement of the buffer zones in the state.
“Instead of merely waiting for my next course of action, people should also raise their voices to know the truth,” he said.
It may be noted that barely a day after multiple improvised explosive devices (IEDs) blasts rocked Nganukon, an abandoned village in the fringe of Manipur’s Bishnupur district adjoining Churachandpur district on January 5, the MP went to the village to take ground stock.
However, the Central security forces deployed in the area denied him access to the village. Furious over denial of entry by the security forces, the MP had remarked “This is where the border of India begins, India with Kuki… I cannot go to this side because this is the India-Kuki border.”
Calling it “a very unfortunate situation that demands immediate clarification,” he alleged that even elected representatives, including MPs, were restricted from freely visiting areas within their own state.
The MP further alleged that the creation of these artificial boundaries have delayed the return of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and it has led to prolonging the ongoing humanitarian crisis.
Meanwhile, People’s Alliance for Peace and Progress in Manipur (PAPPM) unequivocally condemned recent inflammatory, misleading, and divisive statements issued by the “self-styled Kuki History & Identity Protection Committee and the Kuki Human Rights Council. “These statements are riddled with falsehoods, devoid of constitutional basis, and represent a calculated attempt to reignite tensions and sabotage the fragile peace that the people of Manipur are striving to restore, the CSO alleged.
Manipur is, and shall forever remain, an integral and indivisible part of the Republic of India. The state of Manipur constitutes a single, unified administrative and territorial entity.
There exists no political, legal, or constitutional recognition of any entity called “Kukiland” within its boundaries.
PAPPM categorically and unreservedly rejects the concocted narrative of a so-called “Kuki–Meitei boundary buffer zone,” which has no grounding in law, fact, or reality, the statement asserted.
The PAPPM drew the attention to the official clarification issued by Manipur police on May 21, 2024, which categorically stated that no “buffer zone” exists anywhere in Manipur.
The police had further clarified that security forces have been deployed solely in fringe, vulnerable, and sensitive areas as a temporary and preventive measure to deter violence and restrict the movement of miscreants, it reminded.
“These deployments do not signify boundaries, partitions, zones of separation, or any form of territorial reorganization. Any claim to the contrary is deliberate disinformation intended to mislead the public and inflame passions,” it said.
The PAPPM viewed the contents of the said press notes as a direct provocation and a conscious incitement to discord.
“The open endorsement of violence, systematic vilification of communities and elected representatives, and reckless distortion of historical facts constitute a grave threat to public order, social harmony, and national unity.
Such acts prima facie attract the stringent provisions of Indian law relating to sedition, promotion of enmity between groups, and actions prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India,” it went on to assert.