Ten young men from the Kuki-Zo community in Manipur's Jiribam district recently lost their lives in what's been reported as a gunfight with personnel from the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF).

The CRPF claims these individuals, labelled as “militants,” had attacked a local police station and a nearby CRPF camp. However, subsequent post-mortem reports, seen by Newsreel Asia, cast doubt on the legality and ethics of the actions taken by the paramilitary force.

The incident occurred on Nov. 11, as part of an ethnic violence involving the Kuki-Zo tribes and the majority Meitei community in Manipur. The 10 deceased young men were “village volunteers,” between the ages of 16 and 31. The “village volunteers” are members of a civilian guard formed to protect Kuki-Zo areas shortly after violence erupted on May 3, 2023. They were organized in response to frequent attacks by Meitei groups, allegedly supported by members of the Manipur police, which continue to this day.

Running now through Dec. 31, NewsMatch will match your donations up to $1,000. Your generosity will help keep Religion Unplugged going in 2025 and beyond. You can donate here.

Four days earlier, on Nov. 7, a 31-year-old Kuki-Zo woman and mother of three, Zosangkim Hmar, was allegedly assaulted, raped, tortured and burned to death by an armed Meitei group, without any clear provocation.

According to a statement by a Kuki-Zo group, Hmar Students’ Association, before the young men were gunned down, they had approached the CRPF checkpoint in a friendly and cordial manner. They informed the personnel on duty that they were pursuing the killers of the Kuki-Zo woman, Zosangkim, as these assailants had been targeting multiple villages in the Kuki-Zo community.

What transpired next remains unclear. Reports indicate that CRPF personnel, possibly accompanied by members of the Manipur Police, shot the 10 young men, claiming that these men had attacked the police station and CRPF post.

The names of the victims are 16-year-old Robert Lalnuntluong, 19-year-old Joseph Lalditum, 21-year-old Elvis Lalropei Zote, 22-year-old Lalthanei, 25-year-old Francis Lalzarlien, 25-year-old Henry Lalsanglien, 29-year-old Ramneilien, 30-year-old Roulneisang, 30-year-old Lalsiemlien Hmar and 31-year-old Fimlien Kung Ngurte.

The autopsy reports from Silchar Medical College and Hospital, situated in the neighboring state of Assam, revealed that each of the deceased sustained multiple gunshot wounds from behind. This pattern of injury indicates that the young men were either fleeing or not directly engaging at the time they were fatally shot.

According to the reports, the bullets struck the young men from head to foot, hitting them all over their bodies. If the young men were possibly fleeing or, at least, were not in a position to actively fire at the time, it raises questions about why the security forces needed to fire so many rounds with apparent lethal intent.

Further, the reports noted that one eye was missing from the bodies of four of the deceased.

For instance, the autopsy report of Fimlien Kung Ngurte states: “The deceased is found wearing camouflage full shirt, T-shirt, long pants, black shawl, brief, socks and boots. Built is average, complexion is swarthy. Right eye missing, left eye is closed and mouth partially open. Blood stain present ever the face and body at places. Blood oozing from left ear. Body cold on touch. Post mortem hypostasis present and fixed over the back. Rigor mortis (the stiffening of the muscles) partially present over the lower limbs only.”

This suggests the eyes were gouged out after the four men had been killed. One has to wonder what could motivate such a desecration of the bodies other than hate. Were the bodies not under the custody of CRPF personnel? Mutilation of bodies is a violation of international humanitarian law under the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

All CRPF personnel undergo training in human rights, adhering to international standards, both during their initial training and repeatedly after joining their battalions, a retired CRPF official told Newsreel Asia. They are also expected internally to follow the guidelines set by the National Human Rights Commission, the source added.

Further, the use of excessive and disproportionate force contradicts the standards set by law for the use of force by law enforcement.

In the 1993 landmark case of Nilabati Behara vs. State of Orissa, which addressed a custodial death, India’s Supreme Court declared police brutality a violation of fundamental rights, awarding compensation and ordering criminal proceedings against the responsible officers. The Court ruled out sovereign immunity – with the principle that government entities are not exempt from liability in cases of human rights abuses.

Further, India’s penal code applies to all individuals within the country, including members of the armed forces and central forces. Members of the central forces are subject to the same criminal laws as civilians when it comes to criminal activities. However, for actions taken during the course of their official duties, there might be additional considerations under specific acts governing these forces, like the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), which provides certain protections to armed forces operating in designated “disturbed areas.” However, in Jiribam, where the 10 young men were shot and killed on Nov. 11, had not been declared a “disturbed area” under AFSPA until three days later, on Nov. 14.

Above all, police excesses breach the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The oath of the CRPF includes a pledge to uphold the Constitution: “I shall be faithful and bear true allegiance to India and to the Constitution of India as by law established and that I shall as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully serve in the Central Reserve Police Force ...”

The ongoing violence over land rights and identity, which has lasted for 19 months, has resulted in over 250 deaths. Hundreds of villages and thousands of homes have been burned, leaving tens of thousands displaced. Central forces are deployed in Manipur not merely for their arms and ammunition, which the state police also possess, but because they are uniquely positioned to bring neutrality in controlling the violence.

It’s not an incident that should be brushed under the carpet. It calls for a transparent investigation by an independent body to ensure accountability, uphold the rule of law and maintain public trust in government and law enforcement.

After all, in a democratic setting like India, the legitimacy for the armed forces to carry and use arms is a result of a combination of constitutional authority, legislative actions, democratic oversight, judicial review and also public scrutiny, all of which stem from the sovereign will of the people.

This article has been co-published in collaboration with Newsreel Asia.

Vishal Arora is an independent journalist based in New Delhi, India, who covers Asia and beyond. He serves as editor of @Newsreel_Asia and is a board member of The Media Project. He’s written for many outlets including The Wall Street Journal, The Diplomat and The Caravan.