Ahead of its Foundation Day observance, the Coordination Committee (CorCom) issued a statement on July 8, 2025, in which it extended revolutionary greetings to the people of Manipur (Kangleipak) and the wider WESEA (Western South East Asia) region. The group said that the day marked a renewed commitment to its united struggle for protecting the dignity and independence of Manipur and its people. CorCom also paid tribute to all those who had sacrificed their lives in pursuit of the region’s freedom.
In its statement, CorCom asserted that subjugation and domination remained key threats to humanity, and it described such control as imposed rather than natural. It added that resistance against such oppression was a collective responsibility and highlighted that the indigenous people of Manipur had consistently fought against efforts to suppress their identity and heritage.
The committee said that after the end of British colonial rule in 1947, Manipur had initiated its own democratic governance. It stated that general elections were held in 1948 under a constitutional monarchy, where the monarchy became symbolic and power was vested in the people. CorCom added that the modern political movement in Manipur had already begun by then, with figures such as Hijam Irabot playing a prominent role in mobilising civil society towards a democratic and egalitarian society. This, they claimed, reflected an emerging vision of social democracy.
CorCom also reminded that Manipur had formed an Interim Government on August 14, 1947. It noted that prominent indigenous leaders, including R. Bob Khathing, T.C. Tiangkham, and Md. Basiruddin Ahmed, had held ministerial positions in this administration. The group said that steps toward a multi-ethnic and secular Manipur had already been underway.
According to the statement, on March 10, 1947, Manipur had formed a 16-member Constituent Assembly, with representatives such as A. Daiho, Thangkhopao Kipgen, T.C. Tiangkham, Teba Kilong, and R. Suisa playing vital roles. The Constitution of Manipur was formally enacted on July 26 that year, under the title The Manipur Constitution Act.
CorCom further claimed that under the 1947 Constitution Act, Manipur had adopted a system of constitutional monarchy. They said that general elections were held in June and July 1948, and the first session of the Manipur National Parliament was convened on October 18, 1948. During this session, a proclamation by the Head of State (the Maharaja of Manipur) was read out, which, according to CorCom, declared the structure of the government and reaffirmed Manipur’s sovereignty.
The committee quoted the proclamation as stating that “the integrity and separate entity of the state (Manipur) is preserved forever,” referencing assurances attributed to India’s first Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. CorCom interpreted this as a recognition of Manipur as a sovereign political entity, rather than an integrated part of India.
The statement also discussed Manipur’s geographical and cultural uniqueness, describing it as a land composed of both hills and valleys and inhabited by diverse yet unified communities. It stated that the British colonial administration had once administered the hill and valley regions separately, but the first Manipur National Parliament had recognised Manipur as a single unified entity.
CorCom claimed that Manipur’s historical proclamation had laid down the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and multicultural co-existence, portraying Manipur as a “primordial nation” defined by jus sanguinis (right of blood), rooted in shared ancestry and culture. They also argued that, after colonial rule, Manipur had embraced civic nationalism, combining jus sanguinis and jus soli (right of soil), to become a modern constitutional state.
The committee contended that Manipur had developed a distinct democratic constitution and identity, separate from that of India. It stated that the state had been self-reliant, with a surplus economy and a rich socio-cultural heritage, even before the merger with India.
Referring to the phrase “Chingna Koina Pansaba, Chingmeena Koina Pan-Ngakpa,” CorCom said it symbolised Manipur’s deep-rooted historical and cultural legacy. The statement went on to assert that even during British rule, Manipur was recognised as a separate geopolitical entity. It reiterated that Manipur had a thriving civilization before British interference and had developed through its own traditions.
Citing French philosopher Ernest Renan, CorCom explained that a nation is built not only on race or language but on shared history and spiritual bonds. It claimed Manipur fit this definition and criticised what it saw as the erosion of that identity through post-colonial Indian policies.
Finally, the committee questioned the legitimacy of Manipur’s accession to India through the Instrument of Accession in 1947. It argued that Manipur’s status as a historically sovereign and politically advanced region made such a merger contentious, and it reasserted its stance that the people of Manipur must reflect on their history and continue striving for self-determination.