The Congress party has sharply criticized Union Home Minister Amit Shah over his comments regarding the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project, calling his arguments ‘specious’ and misleading. The opposition condemns the project, which threatens not only unique ecosystems but also the livelihoods of indigenous tribes in this region. Prominent environmentalists and conservationists have raised serious concerns about the project’s implications.
Several well-known figures, including Padma Bhushan recipient Ramachandra Guha and wildlife biologist Ravi Chellam, signed a letter to Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav. The letter claims that the ANPAT Regulation (1956) and the Shompen Policy (2015) are being ignored in the hurry to grant clearances for the project. These regulations are crucial for protecting the rights of the indigenous communities affected by such developments.
The signatories allege that the Environmental Appraisal Committee (EAC) disregarded anthropological and ecological objections. They highlight that the denotification of the Galathea Wildlife Sanctuary and the introduction of three new sanctuaries occurred without any consultation with the Great and Little Nicobar islanders. This lack of dialogue provoked apprehension among local communities about the environmental repercussions.
Furthermore, the letter describes the decision-making process as a ‘hollow exercise’, ostensibly aimed at satisfying the Environmental Clearance conditions necessary to enable the project. The consequences of this approach, they argue, will be detrimental to the local ecosystem and indigenous tribes.
Critics express concern about a ‘glaring conflict of interest’ in the involvement of government institutes in formulating and monitoring the project’s environmental management plans. Such collusion undermines the integrity of the environmental processes that should protect vulnerable communities and ecosystems.
The coalition of signatories urged Minister Yadav to set aside political motivations, emphasizing the urgent need to reconsider the project with a focus on its long-lasting and irreversible negative implications. It is urgent for the government to ensure the sustainability of the region’s rich biodiversity and the preservation of local cultures.
Adding to the discourse, Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi, in an opinion piece in “The Hindu”, described the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project as a ‘planned misadventure.’ She claimed the project endangers the survival of the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, poses threats to one of the world’s most unique ecosystems, and reveals a significant vulnerability to natural disasters.
Gandhi emphasized that the project was being advanced without adequate respect for established legal and consultative processes. These alleged oversights only serve to raise alarms among conservationists and advocates for indigenous rights.
In response, Environment Minister Yadav defended the project in the same publication, arguing that it holds significant strategic, defense, and national importance. He insisted that the project incorporates rigorous environmental safeguards, thus addressing concerns raised by critics. Nevertheless, the mounting opposition exemplifies the contentious nature of development projects in ecologically sensitive areas.
As debates continue, the potential impacts of the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project remain a critical topic for environmentalists, indigenous rights activists, and citizens alike. The Congress party’s pushback signals a broader concern for safeguarding India’s rich cultural and environmental heritage amidst rapid developmental pressures.
