PUCL clarified that its recommendations — including involving SoO groups in dialogue and documenting May 3 violence — were rooted in evidence, not partisanship. It added that photos included in the report were shared with consent and represented victims from all communities.
BY PC Bureau
New Delhi, August 28, 2025 — The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has issued a detailed rebuttal to criticisms raised by Manipur Congress MP Angomcha Bimol Akoijam against its 694-page tribunal report on the ethnic conflict in Manipur.
In a letter addressed to the Inner Manipur MP, PUCL said it welcomed his suggestion for a public deliberation on the findings of the Independent People’s Tribunal (IPT), which it constituted in March 2024. The civil rights body stressed that the tribunal’s objective was not to “widen divisions” but to create a foundation for reconciliation through truth-telling, accountability, and justice.
As an elected Lok Sabha Member of Parliament for Manipur, we respect that your concerns are for all communities in Manipur – Kukis and Meiteis, as also the other communities and that your response to the Report arises from the concern of bridging the divisions between the communities to bring about peace and reconciliation to Manipur,” the PUCL stated in its rejoinder.
It went on to add, “ We also share the same concern and desire as you: as a group from different parts of India, we too are keen to help contribute to peace and dialogue amongst various sections of society in Manipur thereby building a process of peace building through truth and reconciliation and. We are sure you will also agree that a lasting peace cannot be achieved without accountability.”
The PUCL asserted that the report was meant to offer a platform for people from the affected communities to share their experiences of the strife and violence they have been subjected to over the last 2 years. “To talk about their “sense of insecurity in being uprooted and displaced while articulating the indignity, fears and insecurity they faced during their exile in relief camps … and their plea to be seen, heard and acknowledged by the rest of India PUCL 2 and the world … and to honestly report both communities’ cry for justice and yearning for peace,” it said.
The PUCL emphasised that the tribunal heard testimonies from Kukis, Meiteis, Nagas, Pangals and other groups during hearings in Bishnupur, Churachandpur, Imphal East and West, Kakching, Kangpokpi, Senapati, Delhi and through online sessions. “Not a single person was turned away,” the organisation said, adding that testimonies were cross-verified with FIRs, documents, photographs, and other evidence.
Responding to allegations of bias, PUCL stated that different readers may interpret events differently, but insisted that the report reflected the voices of survivors from both communities. It pointed to key chapters covering violence, gender-based crimes, relief, rehabilitation, mental health, and accountability, urging critics to engage with the substance of the report rather than isolated sentences.
READ THE ENTIRE PUCL RESPONSE HERE: PUCL-rebuttal-august28
The PUCL rebutted the claim that its report implied collusion between the Meitei community and the Union Home Minister. Instead, it said the text highlighted the “sense of betrayal” among ordinary Meiteis who felt promises of rehabilitation and peace had not been kept.
On suggestions to include Kuki-Zo armed groups under the Suspension of Operations (SoO) pact in peace talks, PUCL said the report merely reflected the need for “all stakeholders, even hostile ones” to be part of a meaningful dialogue. It also defended its use of photographs, clarifying that images were included with family consent or already in the public domain, and were never intended to depict one community as “the other.”
The rights group stressed that the IPT was composed of 14 independent experts from diverse fields — including former Supreme Court judge Justice Kurian Joseph — and three subject specialists. PUCL’s role, it said, was limited to secretarial and logistical support.
PUCL Report Under Fire: Cong MP Akoijam Says It Fuels Division, Ignores Ground Realities https://t.co/R8ov37ncpP #ManipurViolence #BimolAkoijam #PUCLReport #EthnicConflict @Bimol_Akoijam
— POWER CORRIDORS (@power_corridors) August 26, 2025
In its closing remarks, PUCL drew attention to the plight of nearly 60,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Manipur. The group urged MPs and policymakers to act on the tribunal’s recommendations, which include urgent interventions in health care, rehabilitation, and mental health support for displaced families.
In its rebuttal, PUCL sought to clarify misconceptions, defend the tribunal’s methodology, and stress its commitment to truth, peace, and reconciliation in the violence-torn state.
- PUCL Welcomes Debate but Urges Responsible Engagement
PUCL leaders Kavita Srivastava (President) and Dr. V. Suresh (General Secretary) opened their response by welcoming Akoijam’s call for public deliberation on the report.
- They said PUCL was never opposed to constructive criticism, but lamented that much of the backlash was based on broad allegations rather than substantive counter-evidence.
- “The Tribunal and PUCL have the same aim: to contribute to peace and dialogue in Manipur, thereby building a process of truth and reconciliation,” the rebuttal noted.
- Tribunal’s Composition and Credibility Defended
PUCL explained that the Independent People’s Tribunal (IPT) was deliberately constituted with 14 jury members of national standing — including former judges, senior academics, journalists, lawyers, and activists — none from Manipur, to avoid bias.
- Hearings were held across Imphal, Churachandpur, Kangpokpi, Moreh, and Delhi between May–July 2024.
- Over hundreds of testimonies were collected from all ethnic groups: Meitei, Kuki-Zo, Naga, Pangal, and smaller minorities.
- Evidence included FIRs, medical reports, videos, and photographs submitted by families.
- “To claim that the tribunal favoured one community is an insult to the painstakingly impartial process followed,” PUCL asserted.
READ: PUCL Report on Manipur Sparks Meitei Backlash, FIRs Filed
- Allegations of Bias: “Assertions Without Proof”
PUCL rejected Akoijam’s claim that the report was partisan and pro-Kuki-Zo.
- “Barring allegations, very little has been shown as to how the findings are factually wrong,” the statement said.
- The report documents both atrocities against Kukis and attacks on Meiteis, noting how cycles of violence were exacerbated by failures of state authority.
- PUCL warned that dismissing the report wholesale, without pointing out concrete errors, amounts to silencing inconvenient truths.
- The “Betrayal” Reference Clarified
The MP had accused the report of suggesting collusion between Meiteis and the Union government. PUCL clarified:
- The phrase “sense of betrayal” was used to describe disappointment among Meiteis over unfulfilled assurances made by Home Minister Amit Shah during his visit to Manipur in 2023.
- “This is not an allegation of conspiracy — rather, a reflection of community sentiment,” PUCL clarified.
- Inclusion of SoO Groups in Peace Talks Explained
Another major criticism was the tribunal’s suggestion to include Suspension of Operations (SoO) groups in dialogue. PUCL explained:
- Peace-building requires bringing hostile parties together, not excluding them.
- “True dialogue must bring hostile parties face to face… Above all, there must be accountability,” the report stated.
- PUCL stressed this did not mean legitimising violence but acknowledging that lasting peace cannot be achieved without talking to armed actors.
- Use of Photographs and Sensitive Narratives
On charges that the report used selective or inflammatory photographs:
- PUCL clarified that all images were either submitted by families or were already public domain material.
- Confidentiality was respected when families did not consent to publication.
- The intention was to document lived experiences of survivors, not to vilify any group.
- May 3, 2023 Violence: Report’s Approach Defended
Critics accused the report of failing to properly describe the outbreak of violence on May 3, 2023. PUCL responded:
- While the Executive Summary may not capture the entire sequence, Chapters 4–7 provide a detailed reconstruction, drawing on multiple testimonies, cross-verification, and documentary proof.
- The organisation invited critics to highlight specific factual errors rather than issue blanket dismissals.
- Distinction Between PUCL and Tribunal’s Autonomy
PUCL stressed that the report was authored by the tribunal, not PUCL itself.
- “While PUCL facilitated logistics, the findings are solely those of the jury members,” the rebuttal said.
- PUCL insisted it acted as a support platform, ensuring independence of the process.
- Plight of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)
READ: KNO Leader Questions Manipur MP’s Stand on PUCL Report
The rebuttal drew attention back to the core humanitarian crisis:
- Nearly 60,000 internally displaced persons remain in relief camps.
- Reports highlight serious health, mental health, education, and livelihood crises — especially for women, children, the elderly, and differently-abled.
- “It is tragic that instead of engaging with these urgent realities, so much energy is being spent on discrediting the report,” PUCL said.
- Call for Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation
Concluding its rebuttal, PUCL urged stakeholders to treat the report as a starting point for dialogue, not a political weapon.
- “Truthful recounting of facts and events is the only foundation for justice, peace, and reconciliation,” PUCL said.
- The organisation reaffirmed its openness to public scrutiny, debate, and corrections, but warned against attempts to silence independent fact-finding through FIRs or intimidation.
