IMPHAL: The Manipur government has rejected coercive directives from insurgent groups that attempted to punish artists and others who participated in the state’s recent flagship tourism event. Authorities have clarified that no individual or organisation, proscribed or otherwise, has the legal authority to impose sanctions, ban performances, or disrupt lawful cultural and economic activity. The government has warned that anyone seeking to enforce such decrees will be dealt with strictly under the law.
Our correspondent reports that the controversy followed the conclusion of the Manipur Sangai Festival held from November 21 to 30. After the festival ended, a coalition of five proscribed valley-based insurgent groups issued a resolution naming various artists, businesses, and participants, demanding public apologies, and declaring a one-year ban on several traditional theatre troupes.
The government responded swiftly. Senior officials, including the Chief Secretary, issued statements condemning the threats and affirming the state’s commitment to protect citizens’ security and freedoms. “Any attempt to intimidate or endanger the safety and security of any citizen is an act against the state and its people,” declared the administration, adding that intimidation, extortion or violence would not be tolerated. Police sources have confirmed that several First Information Reports have been filed in multiple districts and several arrests have already been made in connection with the issued threats.
Our correspondent adds that the government also called on the public to report any suspicious activity, threats, or extortion attempts. This public appeal is part of a broader effort to restore communal harmony and ensure that civic spaces remain open for cultural expression and economic revival.
This episode underscores the delicate balancing act the state faces as it tries to revive public life and tourism while managing ongoing social and ethnic tensions. For some displaced communities and protest groups, the decision to go ahead with the festival despite unresolved conflict was seen as premature and insensitive. These voices argued that the priority should have been humanitarian relief and dialogue. At the same time, many others defended the Sangai Festival as a necessary step towards restoring livelihoods for performers, traders, hoteliers, and artisans who rely on such events for their incomes and social visibility.
In practical terms the government has signalled that freedom of culture and economic activity cannot be subordinated to extra-legal edicts. “No individual group or organisation has authority to impose decrees, punishments, or restrict lawful cultural or artistic activities in Manipur,” officials affirmed, warning that anyone found attempting to disturb peaceful coexistence will face prosecution according to the law.
Our correspondent reports that the arrests and FIRs serve both legal and deterrent purposes: to identify those who issued and attempted to enforce the threats, and to make clear that coercion and fear cannot be used to shape social behaviour. Law enforcement sources indicate probes are ongoing across several districts, with investigators tracing message flows, identifying perpetrators, and working to dismantle pressure networks targeting artists and organizations.
Our correspondent adds that public reaction has been mixed. Some local leaders and business owners welcomed the government’s stance, saying that artists and traders should not be forced into silence through intimidation. Others, especially among displaced families and community campaigners, argued that the festival should have been postponed until humanitarian and political concerns were addressed. The debate reflects deeper divides in the state, where issues of security, ethnic identity, and economic survival are tightly interwoven.
Observers say the incident offers several lessons. First, resuming public and cultural events after conflict requires careful stakeholder consultation to avoid alienating affected communities. Second, the state’s insistence on upholding rule of law is politically charged: ensuring legal protections for artists and traders may help restore confidence among businesses and cultural workers, but some may see it as downplaying the grievances that led to protests. Lastly, the case shows that even when insurgent groups’ military capacity is weakened, they may still exert influence through social coercion; countering this influence demands both policing and community engagement.
As investigations proceed, the government has urged citizens to cooperate with law enforcement to help ensure peace and normalcy. The public message emphasized that protecting freedom of expression and public safety are not conflicting aims and that the administration will use legal mechanisms to safeguard both.
