UKHRUL: The All Inpui Students Union (AISU) has categorically and unequivocally rejected the claims put forth by the so-called K Songlung Village Authority, terming them “fabricated and misleading”.
In a statement issued on Thursday, the union stated that asserting K Songlung is a legally recognized village under the Manipur Gazette of 1961 is a “blatant distortion” of facts.
It maintained that there exists no historical, administrative, or legal record to substantiate the existence of such a village prior to the 1992–94 Kuki–Naga conflict.
“In the aftermath of that conflict, certain groups of displaced Kukis were temporarily allowed by the Government of Manipur to settle in the reserved forest area of Kangchup, located above Phayeng village. This group later named their settlement Kangchup Songlung (K. Songlung),” it stated.
Also Read | ‘No Such Village Exists’: Inpui Unions Challenge UNC–KIM Claim on K Songlung
Terming the claim that the village was legally recognized on July 28, 1961 as “baseless and misleading”, AISU stressed that no house structure was seen in the examination of historical imagery at Tamphoimon near Waphong as of March 16, 2021, while adding that K Songlung is not at Tamphoimon near Waphong Naga village.
“An examination of historical imagery of the site clearly showed that there were no house structures at the location (Tamphoimon near Waphong) as of March 16, 2021. It was only on November 15, 2022 that the construction of two houses began. In light of this, the claim that the village was legally recognized on 28 July 1961 is baseless and misleading,” it stated.
It further stated, “In fact, Semlan Haokip and Seithang Haokip arrived at Tamphoimon, near Waphong, in 2017 and began poppy cultivation. At that time, only temporary farm structures were erected. The construction of permanent houses commenced only in 2022.”
Also Read | No Village Burnt, Says FNCC; Rejects Kuki CSOs Claims of Arson at K Songlung
It alleged that Semlan Haokip and Seithang Haokip began referring to their habitation area as K Songlung, following the destruction of K Songlung on May 6, 2023 during the Kuki–Meitei conflict.
“They also installed a village signboard, apparently with the intention of availing government welfare schemes such as MGNREGA and NFSA, despite the presence of only two households at the site,” it added.
It further stated that the settlement failed to meet the minimum statutory requirement under the Manipur (Hill Areas Village Authority) Act, 1956, which mandates at least 20 households for village recognition.
“A habitation consisting of merely two huts/Farmhouse cannot, under any circumstances, be accorded the status of a legally recognized village,” it stated.
AISU also rejected the claim regarding the neighbouring villages and said it reflected a deliberate attempt to distort geographical facts.
Also Read | KIM, UNC Condemn Arson at K Songlung Village
“The actual neighbouring villages are K Ponlen, Kangchup Patbung, Kangchup Chiru, Kangchup Makhom, Kadangban, and Phayeng. The villages cited in the opposing claim are geographically distant and irrelevant,” it stated.
It further emphasized that the denial of the existence of Waphong village is both historically untenable and unacceptable.
“Waphong is an ancient and well-documented settlement dating back to the reign of Maharaja Khagemba, with clear references in traditional records. Any attempt to erase or deny its existence is a direct affront to historical truth,” AISU stated, adding that the allegation made by the so-called K Songlung Village Authority that Angam and his associates from Waphong sought to purchase land is completely “baseless and illogical”.
Also Read | AISU Raises Concern Over Reported Army Firing at Volunteer Camp in Waphong Inthan
“The so-called K Songlung settlement is located far from Waphong, beyond several intervening villages and within a reserved forest area, making such claims entirely untenable,” it stated. These fabricated narratives appear to be a calculated attempt to legitimize illegal encroachment and to unlawfully claim benefits under government welfare schemes, AISU alleged and urged the state and central government to investigate the matter, including the role of security forces safeguarding the illegal settlements and illicit activities thoroughly.
AISU also urged the public not to be misled by such false propaganda spread by non-existent K Songlung village authority.