ANY KUKI TRIBE (AKT) was recommended by the late R. Keishing in 1995 and implemented by O. Ibobi Ex. CM in 2003.
To may include all these non Indian tribes.
Let's drill "Any Kuki Tribe (AKT)" agenda with historical and constitutional facts, showing why it was a political manipulation and not a legitimate recognition of an ethnic group.
Unmasking the 'Any Kuki Tribe' Deception
The inclusion of "Any Kuki Tribe (AKT)" in Manipur's Scheduled Tribes list was never based on history, ethnography, or constitutional recognition of a real community. Instead, it was a political compromise pushed by Rishang Keishing in 1995 and later implemented by the Ibobi Singh government in 2003 to pacify Kuki militant groups during ethnic unrest.
1. Not an Indigenous Tribe
- The Constitution of India (Article 342) requires a community to be listed as a Scheduled Tribe only after ethnographic verification by the Registrar General of India (RGI) and recommendation by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs.
- "Any Kuki Tribe" is not the name of a tribe, but a blanket political label created to cover multiple Chin-Mizo-Kuki clans, including even non-Indian migrants from Myanmar and Bangladesh.
- No historical records, census reports, or gazettes before the 1990s mention "Any Kuki Tribe" as a recognised entity in Manipur.
2. Contradiction with Earlier Records
- In the 1911, 1921 and 1931 Census Reports, colonial ethnographers like C.A. Soppitt, T.C. Hodson, and Grierson never listed "Kuki" as a tribe. Instead, they identified distinct tribes: Paite, Thadou, Vaiphei, Hmar, Zou, etc.
- Even R. Keishing's letter (Nov 2, 1995, in the above image) clearly admits that Kuki *is only a generic term,* not a tribe by itself, and that many sub-clans resist being grouped under "Kuki."
3. Political Manipulation
- The addition of "Any Kuki Tribe" in 2003 was an *administrative shortcut* , bypassing anthropological scrutiny, aimed at satisfying the demands of Kuki Inpi and armed groups during the Kuki–Naga–Zo ethnic tensions.
- This blanket term allowed illegal migrants from Myanmar's Chin Hills and Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts to claim Scheduled Tribe benefits in India simply by identifying as "Kuki."
4. Violation of Naga & Zomi Historical Claims
- The Naga tribes of Manipur (Mao, Tangkhul, Maram, Maring, Anal, etc.) have well-documented ancestral territories in Kangpokpi, Chandel, Tengnoupal, Kamjong, and Senapati.
- Historical land records, British administrative maps, and gazettes confirm that these areas were Naga territories long before the Kuki migrations of the late 18th and 19th centuries.
- Nagas never claimed Lamka in historical records; it was always identified with Zomi/Zo tribes such as Paite, Simte, Zou, Vaiphei.
5. Kuki Inpi's Own Constitution Exposes Them
- The Kuki Inpi Constitution (refer to the second image above) shamelessly lists even non-Kuki groups like Lushai, Gangte, Halam (Tripura), Ralte, Simte, Mara, Paite under "Kuki cognate tribes."
- This is a deliberate appropriation project to absorb every Zo/Mizo/Chin-related group under one artificial "Kuki" identity, and that's an act of historical distortion and political expansionism.
Conclusion
The so-called "Any Kuki Tribe (AKT)" is not a legitimate tribe but a fabricated umbrella term engineered by politicians in 1995 and officially slipped into the ST list in 2003 to buy peace with armed Kuki groups. It violates the principles of constitutional recognition, ignores genuine ethnographic distinctions, and enables foreign migrants to exploit India's protective laws.
The Naga and Zomi tribes have clear historical, geographical, and documentary evidence of their ancestral homelands, while Kukis rely only on manipulated labels and post-1990s political lobbying.
Courtesy: Thadou Nam
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
