The Congress party has sharply criticized Union Home Minister Amit Shah regarding his comments on the Great Nicobar Mega Infrastructure Project. This criticism arises amid growing concerns over environmental and anthropological implications tied to the project, prominently affecting the indigenous Nicobarese and Shompen tribes.
On Monday, Congress leaders reiterated their stance, emphasizing that crucial regulations under the ANPAT Regulation (1956) and Shompen Policy (2015) have been overlooked in the haste to grant environmental clearances. They contend that the Environmental Appraisal Committee disregarded valid anthropological and ecological objections from local communities, particularly the impact on the Galathea Wildlife Sanctuary. The sanctuary was reportedly denotified without proper consultation with the Nicobarese islanders.
The Congress party described this approval process as a “hollow exercise”, primarily aimed at satisfying environmental clearance conditions, enabling the project to proceed without addressing critical concerns. The critics argue that decisions taken in such haste undermine the ecological integrity of one of the world’s most unique ecosystems, further fueling local dissent against the project.
Adding to the uproar, signatories of an open letter expressing concern over the project include prominent figures such as Padma Bhushan recipient Ramachandra Guha and renowned wildlife biologist Romulus Whitaker. They highlighted a significant conflict of interest due to government institutes being involved both in creating and assessing the environmental management plans related to the project.
In their plea, the concerned signatories urged Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav to prioritize environmental and cultural integrity over political pressures. “It is imperative to consider the irreversible negative implications of the proposed project on the local population and ecology,” they stated.
Responding to the criticisms, Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi had previously denounced the project as a “planned misadventure”. In an article published in “The Hindu”, she warned that the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project poses a significant threat to the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, suggesting that it could spell disaster for their survival.
Gandhi further alleged that the government’s approach marginalizes legal and deliberative processes that should underpin such massive infrastructure developments. Her comments reflect a growing consensus within Congress that emphasizes the need for a sustainable development model that respects local rights and ecosystems.
In defense of the project, Minister Yadav penned a rebuttal in “The Hindu”, asserting that the Great Nicobar project holds strategic and national significance, amounting to an essential investment in India’s infrastructure and defence logistics. He underscored the project’s potential for economic growth, positing that it would lead to job creation and enhance India’s standing in the region.
The controversy surrounding the Great Nicobar Mega Infrastructure Project not only highlights the tug-of-war between development and conservation but also raises questions about the treatment of indigenous communities in the face of national projects. As the debate intensifies, stakeholders across the spectrum are increasingly calling for thorough ecological assessments and a more inclusive approach to policy-making.
