Churachandpur-Khoupum Protected Forest: Difference between revisions
Post-move clean-up |
Expanding article |
||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Rokibuz Zaman, [https://scroll.in/article/1045527/in-manipur-the-kukis-are-up-in-arms-against-the-majoritarian-bjp-government In Manipur, the Kukis are up in arms against the ‘majoritarian’ BJP government], Scroll.in, 14 March 2023. |
Rokibuz Zaman, [https://scroll.in/article/1045527/in-manipur-the-kukis-are-up-in-arms-against-the-majoritarian-bjp-government In Manipur, the Kukis are up in arms against the ‘majoritarian’ BJP government], Scroll.in, 14 March 2023. |
||
</ref> |
</ref> |
||
After the establishment of the protected forest, a settlement officer |
After the establishment of the protected forest, a settlement officer received claims from villages, evaluated them, and issued settlement orders, defining the land area allocated to the village, which was then excluded from the protected area.<ref name="Dhirendra Kumar"> |
||
Dhirendra Kumar, [https://www.millenniumpost.in/sundaypost/in-retrospect/mending-the-maelstrom-523259 Mending the maelstrom], MillenniumPost, 24 June 2023. |
|||
</ref>{{efn|name=Paolienlal|An example of this for the Ukha Loikhai village was mentioned by the state legislator [[Paolienlal Haokip]]: "The MLA said that so far as the Thangjing Hills are concerned, the Chief of Ukha (Loikhai) has clear orders of the settlement officer, excluding the land belonging to Loikhai village, which includes Thangjing Hills, from the Churachandpur Khopum Protected Forest."<ref name="Paolienlal 17 May 2022"> |
|||
[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/bjp-mla-paolienlal-haokip-slams-bjyms-attempt-to-plant-trees-on-thangjing-hill/ BJP MLA Paolienlal Haokip Slams BJYM’s Attempt To Plant Trees On Thangjing Hill], The Frontier Manipur, 17 May 2022. |
[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/bjp-mla-paolienlal-haokip-slams-bjyms-attempt-to-plant-trees-on-thangjing-hill/ BJP MLA Paolienlal Haokip Slams BJYM’s Attempt To Plant Trees On Thangjing Hill], The Frontier Manipur, 17 May 2022. |
||
</ref>}} |
</ref>}} |
||
| Line 65: | Line 67: | ||
[https://ukhrultimes.com/claim-over-thangjing-hills-treated-as-non-est-no-records-of-so-called-haokip-reserved-manipur-govt/ Claim over THANGJING HILLS treated as Non- Est; No records of so called ‘Haokip Reserved’: Manipur Govt], Ukhrul Times, 19 February 2024. |
[https://ukhrultimes.com/claim-over-thangjing-hills-treated-as-non-est-no-records-of-so-called-haokip-reserved-manipur-govt/ Claim over THANGJING HILLS treated as Non- Est; No records of so called ‘Haokip Reserved’: Manipur Govt], Ukhrul Times, 19 February 2024. |
||
</ref> |
</ref> |
||
It stated that assistant (forest) settlement officers (ASOs), who were appointed enquiry officers in 1971 had passed orders excluding the various villages from the protected area. The government argued that their role was only to conduct an enquiry into the "existing rights" of the communities living in the protected forest; they weren't authorised to pass settlement orders. It said that it appointed a committee to examine the orders issued by the ASOs in June 2022, and cancelled them in December 2022, while also initiating fresh enquiries into the "nature and extent of existing rights of people prior to the notification of protected forests". All the villages were apparently issued "show cause notices" in May 2022 to submit relevant documents to support their claims of ownership.<ref name="Print"/><ref name="Dhirendra Kumar"> |
It stated that assistant (forest) settlement officers (ASOs), who were appointed enquiry officers in 1971 had passed orders excluding the various villages from the protected area. The government argued that their role was only to conduct an enquiry into the "existing rights" of the communities living in the protected forest; they weren't authorised to pass settlement orders. It said that it appointed a committee to examine the orders issued by the ASOs in June 2022, and cancelled them in December 2022, while also initiating fresh enquiries into the "nature and extent of existing rights of people prior to the notification of protected forests". All the villages were apparently issued "show cause notices" in May 2022 to submit relevant documents to support their claims of ownership.<ref name="Print"/><ref name="Dhirendra Kumar"/> |
||
Dhirendra Kumar, [https://www.millenniumpost.in/sundaypost/in-retrospect/mending-the-maelstrom-523259 Mending the maelstrom], MillenniumPost, 24 June 2023. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
The [[Kuki Students Organisation]], which also acts a community advocacy group, raised serious objections to the "office memorandum" of 7 November 2022. It questioned the very formation of the protected forest, claiming that the Government of Manipur "does not have any proprietary rights" over the area, as reportedly required by the Indian Forest Act, 1927.<ref>[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/kso-rejects-manipur-governments-memo-on-forests-says-it-is-illegal-and-arbitrary/ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’], The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022. "The Law Department had also turned “a blind eye to the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, where, under Sub-Section (1) of Section 29, it is clearly stated that- (1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare the provisions of this Chapter applicable to any forest-land or waste-land which, is not included in a reserved forest but which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled”, said KSO."</ref> It asked the government to reverse its policy and start fresh proceedings to ascertain the rights of the government.<ref>[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/kso-rejects-manipur-governments-memo-on-forests-says-it-is-illegal-and-arbitrary/ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’], The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022.</ref> |
The [[Kuki Students Organisation]], which also acts a community advocacy group, raised serious objections to the "office memorandum" of 7 November 2022. It questioned the very formation of the protected forest, claiming that the Government of Manipur "does not have any proprietary rights" over the area, as reportedly required by the Indian Forest Act, 1927.<ref>[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/kso-rejects-manipur-governments-memo-on-forests-says-it-is-illegal-and-arbitrary/ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’], The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022. "The Law Department had also turned “a blind eye to the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, where, under Sub-Section (1) of Section 29, it is clearly stated that- (1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare the provisions of this Chapter applicable to any forest-land or waste-land which, is not included in a reserved forest but which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled”, said KSO."</ref> It asked the government to reverse its policy and start fresh proceedings to ascertain the rights of the government.<ref>[https://thefrontiermanipur.com/kso-rejects-manipur-governments-memo-on-forests-says-it-is-illegal-and-arbitrary/ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’], The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022.</ref> |
||
| Line 113: | Line 113: | ||
Two writ petitions were filed in the [[Manipur High Court]] to contest the government claims about K. Songjang, one by the daughter of the village chief and another by the son of the former village chief of Kungpi Naosen. The court documents show the government having argued that the settlement order of Kungpi Naosen was now "null and void", on account of the November 2022 notification.<ref name="Print"/> |
Two writ petitions were filed in the [[Manipur High Court]] to contest the government claims about K. Songjang, one by the daughter of the village chief and another by the son of the former village chief of Kungpi Naosen. The court documents show the government having argued that the settlement order of Kungpi Naosen was now "null and void", on account of the November 2022 notification.<ref name="Print"/> |
||
== Ukha Loikhai == |
|||
{{OSM Location map |
|||
| coord = {{coord|24.4682|93.6624}} <!-- Map center --> |
|||
| float = right |
|||
| zoom = 12 |
|||
| width = 300 |
|||
| height = 250 |
|||
| caption = {{center|Thangjing Hill and environs}} |
|||
| nolabels = 1 |
|||
| mark-coord1 = {{coord|24.4682|93.6624}} |
|||
| mark1 = Red pog.svg |
|||
| mark-size1 = 10 |
|||
| label1 = Thangjing Hill |
|||
| label-size1 = 10 |
|||
| label-color1 = hard green |
|||
| label-pos1 = left |label-offset-x1 = 0 |label-offset-y1 = 0 |
|||
| mark-title1 = Thangjing Hill |
|||
| mark-description1 = Village demolished in 2023 |
|||
| mark-coord2 = {{coord|24.4603|93.6374}} |
|||
| mark2 = Red pog.svg |
|||
| mark-size2 = 10 |
|||
| label2 = Ukha |
|||
| label-size2 = 10 |
|||
| label-color2 = hard green |
|||
| label-pos2 = left |label-offset-x2 = 0 |label-offset-y2 = 0 |
|||
| mark-title2 = Ukha |
|||
| mark-description2 = The head village of Ukha Loikhai |
|||
}} |
|||
Ukha Loikhai is a village close to the peak of [[Thangjing Hill]], the highest peak in the Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest, which is also of historical and religious significance to the Meiteis. The vicinity of the hill is however populated by the [[Kuki-Zo people]]. [[Ukha, Manipur|Ukha]] is a compact village on the western slope of the hill and Loikhai appears to be the name of the combined farmlands and farmhouses close to the peak. The two villages together now go by the name Ukha Loikhai, under the control of the hereditary chief of Ukha. According to Paolienlal Haokip, the lands around the top of the hill were included the village lands of Loikhai by the settlement order which is now contentious.{{efn|name=Paolienlal}} |
|||
Disputes around the Ukha Loikhai village arose in May 2022 when the Meitei activists belonging to [[Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha]] (the youth wing of the ruling party, [[Bharatiya Janata Party]]) went to carry out tree plantation in the deforested areas of the Thangjing Hill. The villagers opposed their efforts, and subsequently the [[Kuki Students Organisation]] of the [[Henglep block]] issued a statement saying that they were village lands under the control of the Ukha village chief.<ref> |
|||
[https://ukhrultimes.com/kso-calls-activities-at-loikhai-thangting-areas-unethical/ KSO calls activities at Loikhai (Thangting Areas) unethical], Ukhrul Times, 6 May 2022. |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
[https://e-pao.net/GP.asp?src=8..180522.may22 Loikhai village chief is owner of Thangjing Hill; Student body KSO Henglep Block stakes more claims], The Sangai Express, via e-pao.net, 17 May 2022. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
The Meitei activists, organised under the Committee on Protection and Preservation of Historical Rights of Koubru and Thangjing Hill Range (CPPKT), questioned these claims and asserted the rights of the "indigenous" Meitei people. While the immediate dispute was resolved by the Director General of Police, CPPKT asked the government to clarify the issue of ownership.<ref> |
|||
[https://ukhrultimes.com/kso-and-cppkt-reach-agreement-on-thangjing-hills-withdraws-all-press-releases/ KSO and CPPKT reach agreement on Thangjing Hills; Withdraws all press releases], Ukhrul Times, 23 May 2022. |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
[https://www.thesangaiexpress.com/Encyc/2022/5/20/By-Our-Staff-ReporterIMPHAL-May-19-The-Committee-on-Protection-Preservation-of-the-Historical.amp.html Clarify stand on Thangjing Hill : CPPKT to Govt], The Sangai Express, 20 May 2022. |
|||
</ref> |
|||
The government's appointment of a committee to study the settlement orders followed these developments. |
|||
Following further disputes during the [[2023–2024 Manipur violence]], the Government of Manipur issued a statement calling the Kuki bodies' claim on ownership of the Thangjing Hill "fabricated and concocted", citing its erstwhile cancellation of settlement orders in the protected forest. However, it also said that a fresh inquiry has been initiated. According to ''[[The Hindu]]'', the [[National Commission for Scheduled Tribes]] has also initiated an inquiry.<ref> |
|||
[https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/kuki-villages-claim-over-thangjing-hills-concocted-says-manipur-govt-fresh-inquiry-under-way/article67863856.ece Kuki village’s claim over Thangjing Hills ‘concocted’, says Manipur govt.; fresh inquiry under way], The Hindu, 19 February 2024. |
|||
</ref> |
|||
== Notes == |
== Notes == |
||
Revision as of 04:34, 22 February 2024
| Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest | |
|---|---|
   | |
| Location | Manipur, India |
| Nearest city | Bishnupur, Churachandpur |
| Coordinates | 24°28′06″N 93°39′45″E / 24.4682°N 93.6624°E |
| Area | 51.4866 km2 (19.8791 sq mi) |
| Established | September 17, 1966 |
| Governing body | Government of Manipur, Forest Department |
The Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest was declared by the Government of Manipur in India in 1966. It is believed to be largely coincidental with the Thangjing Hills range that bounds the Imphal Valley on the southwest. The protected forest designation was relatively unknown until November 2022, when the government issued a memorandum derecognising 38 tribal villages embedded in the forest area, mainly populated by Kuki-Zo people. Amidst the uproar caused by the announcement, a small village called K. Songjang was dramatically bulldozed in February 2023, with the claim that it had encroached into the protected forest. Tensions arising from this event are stated to be one of the causes of the long drawn 2023–2024 Manipur violence.[1][2][3][4]
Context
Manipur is a state embedded within the Patkai-Arakan Yomas, the eastern counterpart of the Himalayas that interject between the Indian plate and the Eurasian plate.[5] The state consists of a central valley portion, occupying roughly 1,820 km2 (700 sq mi), and the surrounding hill regions of 20,507 km2 (7,918 sq mi). The total forest area of the state is 17,346 km2, forming 77.7% of the land area of the state.[6]
The protected-area network consisting of wildlife sanctuaries and national parts covers 1,132 sq km (roughly 5.07% of the area of the state). In addition, the state has 36 reserve forests (1,467 sq km) and 22 protected forests (4,171&nbps;sq km). The remaining area of 11,131 sq km is unclassified.[7][8]
Establishment
The Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest was notified by the Government of Manipur on 17 September 1966 under Section 29 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.[9] Manipur was a union territory at that time, governed by a centrally-appointed Chief Commissioner, and guided by a Legislative Assembly consisting of 30 elected members and 3 nominated members.[10]
The protected forest covers 51.49 sq km land area,[6] mainly comprising the Thangjing Hills range, which borders the central Imphal Valley on the southwest.[11] Its geographical extent seems to cover the ridge and the slopes on the east and west, including the embedded valleys. It stretches from Songpi in the south to a little north of the Cachar–Bishnupur road. The highest peak on the ridge is Thangjing Hill (2109 m), which is held in reverence by the dominant Meitei community of the Imphal Valley. It is believed to be the abode of god Thangching, the presiding deity of the people of Moirang, and southwest guardian deity for all the Meitei. The devotees of the god conduct an annual pilgrimage to the top of the hill.
According to the government record, there are 38 tribal villages embedded in the forest area, with about 1,000 people each. Each village has several subvillages as per the tribal custom.[3][12] After the establishment of the protected forest, a settlement officer received claims from villages, evaluated them, and issued settlement orders, defining the land area allocated to the village, which was then excluded from the protected area.[13][a] Within the protected area, it is said that even the cutting of firewood is restricted.[7]
Derecognition of villages
On 7 November 2022, the state government issued an "office memorandum" cancelling the recognition of all the villages embedded in the protected forest.[15][16] It stated that assistant (forest) settlement officers (ASOs), who were appointed enquiry officers in 1971 had passed orders excluding the various villages from the protected area. The government argued that their role was only to conduct an enquiry into the "existing rights" of the communities living in the protected forest; they weren't authorised to pass settlement orders. It said that it appointed a committee to examine the orders issued by the ASOs in June 2022, and cancelled them in December 2022, while also initiating fresh enquiries into the "nature and extent of existing rights of people prior to the notification of protected forests". All the villages were apparently issued "show cause notices" in May 2022 to submit relevant documents to support their claims of ownership.[4][13]
The Kuki Students Organisation, which also acts a community advocacy group, raised serious objections to the "office memorandum" of 7 November 2022. It questioned the very formation of the protected forest, claiming that the Government of Manipur "does not have any proprietary rights" over the area, as reportedly required by the Indian Forest Act, 1927.[17] It asked the government to reverse its policy and start fresh proceedings to ascertain the rights of the government.[18]
The state legislator Paolienlal Haokip (MLA from Saikot) questioned how the state government could nullify orders passed by the ASOs who, he claimed, were the statutory authority to settle claims of pre-existing rights in the absence of an FSO (forest settlement officer). There was no special need for the state government to "authorise" them as claimed in the November 2022 notification.[19]
Eviction of K. Songjang
K. Songjang (24°37′40″N 93°41′41″E / 24.6278°N 93.6948°E) is a small Kuki village of 16 families on the Cachar–Bishnupur Road (also called "Old Cachar Road"), which is said to have been a spin-out (or "bifurcation", machete) of an older village called Kungpi Naosen.[1] The village was sent a show cause notice on 10 August 2022 and a reminder notice on 30 January 2023.[9] According to the village chief, this was the first he heard about the Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest.[4] After he sent a response on 6 February, he heard back within four days the decision of the forest officer informing him that the village was an encroachment into protected forest and that he should vacate it.[4] In a press note, the forest department claimed that the village was established "only in the year 2021",[4] which was apparently concluded by examining Google Maps imagery.[3]
On 20 February, a demolition team arrived with 6 JCB bulldozers and a large number of police and forest personnel. "They threw stones at the poultry coops, took away the chickens, destroyed the pigsty, and towed away the squealing pigs," according to a former resident. The houses and a church were razed to the ground. A request for additional time to collect their belongings was denied. The villagers, who used to live on farming vegetables and fruits, have no livelihood after the demolition of the village.[4]
Commentators note that the villagers have deep roots in the area. The village chief said his parents arrived in the area in 1800s, lived through Japanese attacks during the World War II and the chief himself helped the government officials carry out a road survey in 1958.[4] But the forest department said there was no record of a bifurcation of a village and even if that were the case, bifurcation was not allowed in a protected forest.[4][9]
Two writ petitions were filed in the Manipur High Court to contest the government claims about K. Songjang, one by the daughter of the village chief and another by the son of the former village chief of Kungpi Naosen. The court documents show the government having argued that the settlement order of Kungpi Naosen was now "null and void", on account of the November 2022 notification.[4]
Ukha Loikhai
Ukha Loikhai is a village close to the peak of Thangjing Hill, the highest peak in the Churachandpur–Khoupum Protected Forest, which is also of historical and religious significance to the Meiteis. The vicinity of the hill is however populated by the Kuki-Zo people. Ukha is a compact village on the western slope of the hill and Loikhai appears to be the name of the combined farmlands and farmhouses close to the peak. The two villages together now go by the name Ukha Loikhai, under the control of the hereditary chief of Ukha. According to Paolienlal Haokip, the lands around the top of the hill were included the village lands of Loikhai by the settlement order which is now contentious.[a]
Disputes around the Ukha Loikhai village arose in May 2022 when the Meitei activists belonging to Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (the youth wing of the ruling party, Bharatiya Janata Party) went to carry out tree plantation in the deforested areas of the Thangjing Hill. The villagers opposed their efforts, and subsequently the Kuki Students Organisation of the Henglep block issued a statement saying that they were village lands under the control of the Ukha village chief.[20][21]
The Meitei activists, organised under the Committee on Protection and Preservation of Historical Rights of Koubru and Thangjing Hill Range (CPPKT), questioned these claims and asserted the rights of the "indigenous" Meitei people. While the immediate dispute was resolved by the Director General of Police, CPPKT asked the government to clarify the issue of ownership.[22][23] The government's appointment of a committee to study the settlement orders followed these developments.
Following further disputes during the 2023–2024 Manipur violence, the Government of Manipur issued a statement calling the Kuki bodies' claim on ownership of the Thangjing Hill "fabricated and concocted", citing its erstwhile cancellation of settlement orders in the protected forest. However, it also said that a fresh inquiry has been initiated. According to The Hindu, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes has also initiated an inquiry.[24]
Notes
- ^ a b An example of this for the Ukha Loikhai village was mentioned by the state legislator Paolienlal Haokip: "The MLA said that so far as the Thangjing Hills are concerned, the Chief of Ukha (Loikhai) has clear orders of the settlement officer, excluding the land belonging to Loikhai village, which includes Thangjing Hills, from the Churachandpur Khopum Protected Forest."[14]
References
- ^ a b Declaration of village land as protected forest areas in the hill district of Manipur triggers statewide protests, Land Conflict Watch, 18 April 2023.
- ^ Nandita Haksar's New Book Explores Genesis of Manipur's Ongoing Ethnic Violence, The Quint, 27 December 2023.
- ^ a b c Dhiren A. Sadokpam, What is really behind the violence in Manipur?, Frontline, 6 May 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Karishma Hasnat, ‘They came with 6 JCBs’— How eviction of a tiny village sparked fires across Manipur, The Print, 16 May 2023.
- ^ United States Weather Bureau (1942), Climate and Weather of Southeastern Asia: India, Burma, and southern China, Volume 1, U.S. Government Printing Office, p. 68
- ^ a b Forest of Manipur, Government of Manipur, retrieved 19 February 2024.
- ^ a b Ziipao, Raile Rocky (2020), Infrastructure of Injustice: State and Politics in Manipur and Northeast India, Taylor & Francis, pp. 53–54, ISBN 9781000067972
- ^ Sanjebam Jugeshor Singh, Why are people evicted from protected areas?, Imphal Free Press, 14 March 2023.
- ^ a b c Forest Department Manipur, An eight-point response showing tribals are not threatened in Manipur, EastMojo, 13 March 2023. "Churachandpur-Khoupum Protected Forest was notified under Section 29 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 by the Government of Manipur with a well-defined schedule of boundaries vide Notification No. 55/10/66-M (2) dated 17.09.1966 and Manipur Extra Ordinary Gazette No.124-EI00 dated 21.09.1966."
- ^ Sinha, L. P. (1987), "The Politics and Government of Manipur", The Indian Journal of Political Science, 48 (4): 488, JSTOR 41855332
- ^ Forest Department to intensify tree plantation drives, The Sangai Express, 6 June 2022.
- ^ Rokibuz Zaman, In Manipur, the Kukis are up in arms against the ‘majoritarian’ BJP government, Scroll.in, 14 March 2023.
- ^ a b Dhirendra Kumar, Mending the maelstrom, MillenniumPost, 24 June 2023.
- ^ BJP MLA Paolienlal Haokip Slams BJYM’s Attempt To Plant Trees On Thangjing Hill, The Frontier Manipur, 17 May 2022.
- ^ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’, The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022.
- ^ Claim over THANGJING HILLS treated as Non- Est; No records of so called ‘Haokip Reserved’: Manipur Govt, Ukhrul Times, 19 February 2024.
- ^ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’, The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022. "The Law Department had also turned “a blind eye to the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, where, under Sub-Section (1) of Section 29, it is clearly stated that- (1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare the provisions of this Chapter applicable to any forest-land or waste-land which, is not included in a reserved forest but which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled”, said KSO."
- ^ KSO Rejects Manipur Government’s Memo On Forests; Says It Is ‘Illegal And Arbitrary’, The Frontier Manipur, 30 November 2022.
- ^ BJP MLA Questions Revenue, Forest Depts’ Survey In Churachandpur-Khoupum Forest, The Frontier Manipur, 15 April 2023.
- ^ KSO calls activities at Loikhai (Thangting Areas) unethical, Ukhrul Times, 6 May 2022.
- ^ Loikhai village chief is owner of Thangjing Hill; Student body KSO Henglep Block stakes more claims, The Sangai Express, via e-pao.net, 17 May 2022.
- ^ KSO and CPPKT reach agreement on Thangjing Hills; Withdraws all press releases, Ukhrul Times, 23 May 2022.
- ^ Clarify stand on Thangjing Hill : CPPKT to Govt, The Sangai Express, 20 May 2022.
- ^ Kuki village’s claim over Thangjing Hills ‘concocted’, says Manipur govt.; fresh inquiry under way, The Hindu, 19 February 2024.