In his paper, the former chief minister analysed the developments in Manipur after the alleged rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama Devi on 11 July 2004 by personnel of the Assam Rifles. The former chief minister was of the view that the AFSPA, which has been in force for more than two decades in Manipur, had failed to counter insurgency. He stated that the AFPSA should be revoked and the Government of India should initiate a dialogue with Manipuri insurgent outfits. The former chief minister suggested that the Government of India should outline a roadmap for lasting peace and development in Manipur.

In his presentation, Gen. Roychowdhury said that there was a clash of cultures was taking place in the Northeast. General Roychowdhury observed that different ethnic groups in Manipur and the Northeast were fighting against each other. The General cautioned against any hasty decision with regard to the Act and asserted that the problems of Manipur have to be resolved by the people of Manipur themselves. The General also mentioned that there were contradictory reports over the Manorama Devi case. While some reports mentioned that she was raped and murdered, others indicated that Manorama was a member of an insurgent outfit and an expert in Improvised Explosive Device (IED). Some media reports also claimed that Manorama was killed by security forces while she was trying to flee. As a first step towards addressing the grievances of Manipuri people, General Roychowdhury said that the Government of India should direct the Assam Rifles to vacate the Kangla Fort, which is a cultural and historical symbol for Manipuris.

Former Intelligence Bureau official M.K.Dhar was of the view that there was no clash of cultures in Manipur or the Northeast. Shri. Dhar questioned several observations made by other analysts on the issue of disunity among Manipuri groups. He said that there was no part or state in India where there is complete unity. He blamed the policy of reservation as the main reason for the differences between different ethnic groups in Manipur. He asserted that corruption in the Northeast had become rampant because of the Central Government's policy of appointing top level officials in that region. He also said that there has been no debate on the 1949 merger of Manipur with the Indian Union. This, according to him, had alienated the people of Manipur. Shri. Dhar asserted that it is the responsibility of the Central Government to resolve the Manipur situation and facilitate development in the Northeast.

Former DG BSF, E. N. Rammohan, said that the Government of India had committed several policy mistakes in the past which have to be rectified in order to address the grievances of the people of the Northeast. In his presentation, the former DG BSF gave an overview of the history and geography of Manipur. According to him, the policy of reservation and the delay in granting statehood to Manipur were some of the key policy mistakes made by the Central Government. Mr. Rammohan said that there were several provisions in the CrPC which prevent the abuse of power. He said that similar provisions in the AFSPA were not included which allowed security forces to commit excesses. Mr. Rammohan asserted that corruption was one of the main hurdles in restoring stability in the Northeast. He urged the Government to identify officers who are prone to corruption and transfer them out of the region. He also pointed to the need for boosting infrastructure development including road network in the Northeast to promote trade. Mr. Rammohan recommended that the Government should formulate a policy which could facilitate youth from the Northeast to visit other places in India and interact with people. This, according to him, would help in emotionally integrating the people of the Northeast with the rest of India.

Discussions during the Roundtable were centred on whether the AFSPA should be revoked or not. Given the recent developments in Manipur including protests and immolations, most of the participants were of the view that the Government should revoke the Act. Participants were, however, agreed on the fact that restoring stability and ushering development in the Northeast was a responsibility of the Central Government.