The Congress party has strongly criticized Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s statements regarding the Great Nicobar Mega Infrastructure Project, calling them a ‘specious argument.’ This response comes amid rising concerns about the ecological and anthropological impact of the project on the Great Nicobar Islands.
Various environmentalists and leading figures, including Padma Bhushan Ramachandra Guha and wildlife biologist Ravi Chellam, signed a letter contesting the project. They assert that the regulations established under the ANPAT Regulation (1956) and the Shompen Policy (2015) have been ignored in the rush for clearances.
According to the signatories, the Environmental Appraisal Committee has overlooked vital anthropological objections and ecological factors. They specifically pointed out that the Galathea Wildlife Sanctuary was denotified, and three new sanctuaries were created without consulting local islanders.
They described the process as a “hollow exercise,” claiming that the project merely satisfies the conditions for environmental clearance without considering its profound implications. Additionally, the letter highlighted a glaring conflict of interest, as government institutes involved in preparing and monitoring environmental management plans have been criticized.
In a decisive move, the signatories urged the Environment Minister to disregard political factors and reconsider the irreversible consequences that the proposed project could entail for the island’s ecology and its indigenous tribes.
Notable environmental advocates like Padma Shri Romulus Whitaker and conservationist Asad Rahmani echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the need to protect the unique flora and fauna of the islands.
In an opinion piece published in “The Hindu,” Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi labeled the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project a ‘planned misadventure.’ She expressed grave concerns over the survival of the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, asserting that the project jeopardizes one of the world’s most unique ecosystems and heightens vulnerability to natural disasters.
Gandhi criticized the government’s approach, alleging that it trivializes critical legal and deliberative processes. The Congress party’s challenge of Shah’s assertions seems to stem from a broader contention over environmental governance and indigenous rights.
In response to Congress’s claims, Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav defended the Great Nicobar project, emphasizing its strategic, defense, and national importance in an article published in the same newspaper. He called for understanding the project’s potential benefits, suggesting that it would bolster India’s position in the region.
With the political landscape becoming increasingly contentious, both the Congress and the Environment Ministry seem rooted in their respective positions, fueling a vigorous debate on the balance between development and environmental conservation.
