NOWADAYS in every corner, we have been discussing being tribal and indigenous in a confusing manner. In short, indigenous refers to being a native or the original inhabitant of a particular place whereas tribal refers to being a tribe possessing certain characteristics and qualities of basic social organization and value system. No doubt, many people use contextually these two terms i.e. tribe and indigenous synonymously. In case of addressing their grievances and rights, these peoples may be taken up at the same level as people depending on the circumstances. Whereas the identities of these two peoples are concerned, they are people of different socio-politico-historical positions. As per ILO Convention No. 169, the description of “indigenous people” contains several elements which are not found in its description of “tribal people” for instance i) Historical continuity; ii) Territorial connection; and iii) Distinct social, economic, cultural and political institutions. In some cases, a group not only possesses tribal status but indigenous features also. On the other hand, one’s indigeneity is permanent and cannot be erased but the status of being a tribe will, in the course of time, vanish through a journey of gradual refinement- the so-called detribalization process. But, the status of their indigeneity will remain. It should be very clear that all tribal people are not indigenous and all indigenous are not tribal.
Also Read | Meiteis’ exclusion from the ST list is by their own choice; Kalelkar Commission Report of 1956
Here, it may be mentioned that the question of indigenous people is very contextual and controversial everywhere. In the context of India, the honourable supreme court judgment “Kailas & Others Vs State of Maharashtra” dated 5th Jan 2011 has not mentioned even a single North East mongoloid people as original inhabitants of India in any area of the verdict particularly in the judgment point No. 26 also. And in point No. 20 also, it has been mentioned that the North East mongoloid people are likely to be immigrants. India cunningly accepts the term indigenous people on the ground that all those who have already settled before independence are indigenous people of India. So, Original Inhabitants of India and Indigenous People of India become two different terminologies. Whatever the case, Meitei are claiming indigenous status as per ILO convention and no one dares to reject it. Because of this, the Indian government allows to implement the Inner Line Permit System in Manipur, which is not permitted in any non-indigenous state.
In the context of Meitei, not only British scholars, but all the historians including Manipuri scholars agree that Meitei began their early life in the hills. The coming down from the hills and settling at foothills to plain valley area are events of the prehistoric period. The ancestors of present day Meitei clans such as Mangang, Luwang, Khuman, Angom, Chenglei, Ningthouja, Moirang were settled in different parts of valley area as independent principalities. They had their own chiefs with different identities, dress codes, dialects, territories, spiritual beliefs and traditions etc. Even though the then society of those principalities was obviously characterized by a tribal way of life it is wrong to claim the much evolved Meitei of present to be a tribe on the basis of social characteristics of their ancient early settlement. The evolution of Meitei civilization as a historical process, which had been taking place since Nongda Lairen Pakhangba (33AD) till the formation of Nation State around eleventh century is inseparable from the emergence of the composite Meitei identity
About The Author
