Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Manipur High Court has recently issued notice in a  Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by the International Meiteis Forum (IMF) which seeks to “quash” the fact-finding report published by the Editors’ Guild of India on the ethnic violence in the State. 

A division bench comprising Chief Justice M.V. Muralidaran and Justice Ahanthem Bimol Singh issued notices to all respondents and posted the matter for hearing on October 12.

The bench gave the Editors’ Guild of India (EGI) and its members four weeks to file response in the PIL.

The plea sought 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”.

The Editors' Guild of India (EGI), the All Manipur Working Journalists' Union (AMWJU), and the three members of EGI who visited the State for their report have all been named by the IMF, which has filed numerous PILs in the Manipur High Court since the ethnic conflict started on May 3.

The EGI released the report on September 2, 2023 in response to a complaint from the Indian Army over the circulation of false information 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. 

Thereafter, 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 last week moved 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 claimed that by bringing the complaint to the EGI, the Indian Army had "exceeded its jurisdiction" because their responsibility was to simply "assist the civil administration of the State in this hour of need."

The IMF further asserted that by acting on the aforementioned complaint "by hoodwinking all stakeholders including the State Government and the local journalists," the EGI again went beyond its authority. It 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 IMF also stated 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. It alleged that the report’s publication was done for the hatred between the two communities escalating.

[Inputs: The Hindu]