Environmental impact should be more important than strategic importance: Litigant on Nicobar ruling

Days after the National Green Tribunal cleared the way for the Rs 81,000-crore Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project, Debi Goenka, the executive trustee of the Conservation Action Trust CAT, said the tribunals ruling should have been more concerned about the projects environmental impact than its strategic importance.

Days after the National Green Tribunal cleared the way for the Rs 81,000-crore Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project, Debi Goenka, the executive trustee of the Conservation Action Trust (CAT), said the tribunal's ruling should have been more concerned about the project's environmental impact than its strategic importance. CAT, a Mumbai-based non-profit organisation formed to protect the environment, was part of the ''first round'' of litigation, which challenged the environmental clearance (EC) granted to the project before the NGT in 2022. The tribunal refused to interfere with the project's clearance at the time, too. ''The NGT and even the Supreme Court are not willing to stay a project which impacts the environment if the government has a significant interest in it,'' Goenka said. The tribunal's ruling on February 16 came in response to the ''second round'' of litigation, where it reviewed the findings of the High-Powered Committee, formed by the NGT in 2023 to ''revisit'' issues pertaining to coral conservation, the adequacy of environmental data, and zoning violations. In its order, the NGT adopted a ''balanced approach'' that weighed environmental safeguards against the project's strategic importance. ''There is already a defence establishment on the island that the armed forces have used for decades. I do not see how a commercial port enhances defence. Also, the NGT was meant to protect the environment. If it is more concerned with strategic interest than the environment, we do not need an environmental tribunal,'' Goenka said. The project, spread over 166 sq km, comprises the construction of a transshipment port, an integrated township, a civil and military airport, and a 450-MVA gas and solar power-based plant. The Centre has argued that as the project is located on the Great Nicobar island -- close to the Malacca Strait, a crucial international shipping lane -- it will help boost India's maritime trade and counter the growing presence of foreign powers in the region. Environmentalists like Goenka, however, have said that these ''advantages'' will come at a severe environmental and social cost. For instance, the environmentalists claimed that parts of the project fall under the 'CRZ-IA' area, which is the most ecologically sensitive area within the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) framework. The area that the environmentalists referred to is the location of the proposed transshipment port, the southern tip of Great Nicobar at Galathea Bay, which is a giant leatherback turtle nesting ground, the site of corals and mangroves and where the endangered Nicobar megapodes live and nest. ''The project will destroy 130 sq km of pristine forest. We do not even know what endemic or endangered species these forests contain or their biodiversity value to mankind. The project will impact the corals in the area, and also destroy nesting sites of turtles,'' Goenka said. But in its order, the NGT accepted the Centre's stand that, based on a site visit by a team from the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM), no part of the project was in a CRZ-I area. The tribunal also accepted the Zoological Survey of India's (ZSI) finding that no major coral reefs existed in the Galathea Bay and only ''scattered'' coral colonies were there, which could be protected through translocation. Goenka also said that the Great Nicobar project would adversely affect the indigenous communities, especially the Shompen people. ''The Shompen are a small group existing only on this island. They have very little contact with civilisation and a lifestyle we still do not fully understand. They travel along stream beds because there are no roads in their forest. If the project destroys this forest, which is part of their territory, nobody knows the full impact, but it certainly will not be positive,'' the environmentalist said. The NGT has noted that the indigenous tribe will not be disturbed or displaced due to the project, and their habitat rights will be protected under the Forest Rights Act. However, in January, the tribal council of Great Nicobar alleged that the island administration was pressuring them to surrender claims to these villages. While the NGT, in its ruling, ordered the authorities to ensure ''full and strict'' compliance with the conditions listed in the EC, Goenka remains sceptical. ''How will one monitor if the authorities are complying with these conditions? It is difficult to reach the island, and one needs official permission and machinery to go there. Also, if six years later I go to the NGT and say, for example, that the leatherback turtle's nesting ground has been destroyed, will the tribunal stop the project? I really doubt that,'' he said.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)