The Internet Ban in Five Districts of Manipur: A Step in the Wrong Direction?

The recent decision by the government of Manipur to impose an internet ban in five districts is a move that has raised many eyebrows and left the Manipuri people questioning the rationale behind it. The prolonged ethnic crisis, which has now escalated with ongoing protests and persistent terror attacks by Kuki militants targeting Meitei villages, is undeniably a volatile situation. However, the selective internet ban, rather than a blanket suspension across the state, has stirred up concerns about the message the government is sending. The question on many minds is this: does this selective ban suggest that the violence is primarily being driven by the Meitei community?
The imposition of internet bans has become a common response by governments across India in times of unrest, especially in Manipur. However, in the digital age, this blunt instrument of control is increasingly seen as a violation of people’s fundamental right to information. In 2023, the Manipur High Court ruled that internet shutdowns are a breach of this right and ordered the restoration of services during a similar crisis. This legal precedent makes the recent ban even more troubling, as it not only impacts the free flow of information but also disrupts the lives and livelihoods of countless individuals, particularly youth who rely on the internet for work and education.
The government’s decision to ban the internet in these five districts appears to stem from a desire to control the spread of rumors and misinformation, which have undoubtedly fueled much of the unrest. However, in today’s world, where digital communication is a lifeline, shutting down the internet may not suppress public agitation as effectively as authorities hope. On the contrary, it often exacerbates frustrations, driving people to protest more fervently against what they perceive as a state-imposed gag order.
Manipur has been at the center of ethnic tension for months, and with each passing day, the crisis deepens. Meitei civilians, who have been at the receiving end of Kuki militant attacks, feel that the government’s selective response is an indication of bias. The decision to ban the internet only in the valley districts, home to the majority of the Meitei population, while leaving the hill districts unaffected, sends a worrying signal. Is this an acknowledgment by the state that the violence is being initiated by the Meitei? If so, it is a gross oversimplification of the situation.
The internet ban, in this context, does little to address the root causes of the violence. Instead, it creates an information vacuum, fueling rumors and speculation rather than curbing them. In a world where information spreads rapidly, the shutdown only prevents legitimate news sources from reaching the public, while rumors and disinformation find their way through alternative channels.
Moreover, the ban has severe economic consequences. The youth of Manipur, many of whom work remotely or rely on the internet for their education, are being disproportionately affected. In a state where employment opportunities are already scarce, the shutdown further cripples the digital economy. Young entrepreneurs, freelancers, and students are left without access to their livelihoods and educational resources, making the internet ban not only a violation of rights but also an obstacle to the state’s development.
The government’s actions point to a larger issue: the lack of a coherent strategy to address the crisis. Resorting to internet bans may provide a temporary solution, but it is not a long-term answer. The government needs to adopt a more strategic approach, one that focuses on dialogue, conflict resolution, and the restoration of trust among the communities. Instead of silencing dissent, the state must find ways to engage with the public, using the internet as a tool to promote peace and understanding, rather than shutting it down in times of crisis.
In conclusion, the internet ban in the five districts of Manipur highlights the government’s miscalculated response to the ongoing crisis. While the situation is undoubtedly complex, banning the internet is not the solution. A wise government would recognize the value of the internet in today’s world and use it as a means to prevent violence and misinformation, not as a tool for suppression. What is needed now is strategic planning and an inclusive approach that brings together all communities to find a path to peace. The people of Manipur deserve better, and they have the right to information, communication, and livelihood – all of which are severely impacted by this internet ban.