The fast concluded after Union Home Ministry officials, led by Prashant Lokhande, Joint Secretary for Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, delivered a letter to Wangchuk. This letter confirmed that the high-powered committee (HPC) on Ladakh, headed by Nityanand Rai, Minister of State for Home Affairs, would meet on December 3, 2024, to restart talks. Lokhande personally handed Wangchuk a glass of juice to mark the end of the fast. Wangchuk, alongside other Ladakhi activists, accepted the gesture, signalling the temporary resolution of their immediate demand for the resumption of dialogue.

(Details of Sonam Wangchuk’s fast may be read here, here and here) 

A renewed hope for meaningful dialogue

Wangchuk, addressing the press through a live stream on his YouTube channel, expressed cautious optimism. “Our main appeal has been resolved,” he said, referring to the renewal of talks that had been stalled for months. “I hope both sides engage in these discussions with solidarity and good faith, aiming for outcomes that benefit not just Ladakh but the entire nation.”

ON 16th DAY TODAY OUR FAST ENDED
As Joint Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs brought me the notification for resumption of talks between Ladakhi leaders & Government of India.
I hope the talks will be held in mutual trust & will result in a happy ending for all &
I will not have… pic.twitter.com/4BUrhXJWYc

— Sonam Wangchuk (@Wangchuk66) October 21, 2024

Other leaders from the Ladakh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), who had been fasting alongside Wangchuk, shared his sentiment. Sajjad Kargili, a member of the KDA and the 17-member HPC, noted that their primary demand was the resumption of meaningful talks on Ladakh’s development. “We hope the leadership will hold crucial discussions on our four demands. The date has been set, and we look forward to participating in these talks,” Kargili said.

Leaders like Tsering Dorjay Lakruk, co-chairman of LAB, echoed these hopes, expressing gratitude to those who supported their movement. “It was a true display of unity in diversity in India,” Wangchuk added, acknowledging the solidarity shown by students, NGOs, and citizens across the country. The fast, though arduous, symbolised a collective desire for Ladakh’s future to be shaped by its people.

Looking forward, cautiously optimistic

Though relieved that their primary demand had been met, the Ladakhi leaders made it clear that the journey is far from over. Chering Dorjay Lakruk, president of the Ladakh Buddhist Association (LBA), emphasised that while talks would resume, their demands were yet to be fully addressed. “We hope that these talks will lead to a meaningful solution,” he said, stressing the importance of sustained and sincere dialogue with the Union government.

Ladakh’s MP Mohmad Haneefa also voiced his hope that the government would take their concerns seriously and work towards a lasting resolution. The fast, he noted, had become necessary after months of silence from the government following the Lok Sabha elections.

As the Ladakhi delegation prepares to return home, Wangchuk expressed hope that such drastic measures would not be required again. “I hope this is the last time we need to fast for our demands,” he said. Though they leave with their “main appeal fulfilled,” the Ladakhi people remain cautious, hoping that the upcoming talks in December will bring tangible outcomes for Ladakh and the preservation of its fragile environment.

Widespread solidarity for Sonam Wangchuk’s cause

On October 20, climate activist Sonam Wangchuk received a powerful show of support when Jagadguru Shankaracharya visited his protest site at Martyrs Park in Leh. The visit marked the 15th day of Wangchuk’s indefinite fast, which he had undertaken along with 20 fellow Ladakhis to press for the implementation of the sixth schedule in Ladakh. Wangchuk shared his gratitude via social media, stating, “From villages bordering China and Pakistan to the city of Leh, people observed a fast in solidarity. In Delhi, hundreds came to join us, only to be forcibly detained and bundled into buses.” The Shankaracharya’s visit further underscored the growing national support for Ladakh’s struggle.

15th DAY ON SALT & WATER
On the 15th day of fast Jagadguru Shankaracharya ji visited the anshan place at martyrs park in Leh to support the movement.
Villages in Ladakh observed fast from those bordering China & Pakistan to the city of Leh.
In Delhi 100s of people came to join… pic.twitter.com/4C52OfzchO

— Sonam Wangchuk (@Wangchuk66) October 20, 2024

Two days earlier, on October 18, the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) had also expressed solidarity with the Ladakhi people’s demand to be included in the sixth schedule of the Constitution. The NAPM, which represents progressive organisations and movements across India, urged the Union government to fulfil its promise of meaningful dialogue with Ladakhi leaders. The alliance warned that the ecological and cultural fabric of the Himalayas is at risk due to “destructive development.” In a statement, NAPM expressed shock that Wangchuk and his supporters had been forced to launch another indefinite fast after previous assurances from the government were left unfulfilled.

NAPM activists, including prominent figures like Prafulla Samantara—who led a historic 12-year legal battle to protect Indigenous land rights—stood in solidarity with the Ladakhi cause. Through a video message, Samantara and other activists vowed to fast from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. in support of Wangchuk.

Embed video shared by ma’am on whatsapp

Activists such as Medha Patkar, Arundhati Dhuru, Suniti S R, Neelam Ahluwalia, and others also lent their voices to the movement, calling on Indian citizens to rally behind Ladakh’s demands. NAPM emphasised the need for the government to engage in peaceful dialogue with Ladakh’s people, respecting their constitutional rights and their call to preserve both Ladakh’s natural beauty and its Indigenous communities.

Statement from NAPM –

“We also appeal to all Indian citizens, who support decentralised development planning and employment opportunities for locals – a demand being raised all across India, to support the demands of the people of Ladakh,”https://t.co/prWMe4rZGW

— NAPM India (@napmindia) October 11, 2024

In addition to national organisations, regional groups have also shown their support. On October 14, Friends of Ladakh-Bengaluru organised a one-day fast at Freedom Park to back Wangchuk’s mission. The group echoed his call for Ladakh to be included in the sixth schedule, which would grant Ladakhis greater control over their resources and ensure sustainable development. This wasn’t the first time Wangchuk had taken such a stand—in March, he completed a 21-day climate fast in Ladakh to remind the Union government of its promise to protect the region’s fragile ecosystem and empower its people.

Related:

Delhi Chalo padyatra: Sonam Wangchuk begins indefinite fast at Ladakh Bhawan

Why is Ladakh Protesting?

Fulfill Promises Made To People Of Ladakh: Sonam Wangchuk In Fresh Appeal To Modi

The post A victory for Ladakh’s voices: Sonam Wangchuk and Ladakhi activists break 16-day fast as union government agrees to renew talks on demands appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 A peaceful protest met with force

The protests outside Ladakh Bhawan were part of a larger movement led by Wangchuk, who began an indefinite hunger strike on October 6. His primary demand is the inclusion of Ladakh in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India, which would grant the region constitutional safeguards similar to those afforded to tribal areas in the north-eastern states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram. These provisions establish autonomous councils with legislative, judicial, executive, and financial powers, giving these regions control over their own affairs and protecting their cultural identities.

Despite the peaceful nature of the demonstration being led by Wangchuk, the Delhi Police detained Wangchuk and about 20 to 25 protesters, including women, who had come to express solidarity with the cause. Pursuant to the detention, the Delhi police, which comes under the control of the union home minister, cited the absence of permission to protest outside Ladakh Bhawan, emphasising that the application to hold a protest at Jantar Mantar was still under consideration. By 11 a.m. on Sunday morning, approximately 100 supporters had gathered at the protest site. However, the police began blocking roads and making detentions around 10:30 a.m., effectively stifling the gathering. The protesters, who maintained that they were not raising slogans but merely sitting peacefully, were forcefully removed and taken to various police stations.

 Article 19 of the Constitution under blatant attack

This state action against Wangchuk and his supporters is not just an isolated event—it strikes at the heart of Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees citizens the fundamental rights to freedom of speech, expression, and peaceful assembly. The police’s justification for their actions was the imposition of Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, a law often used to prevent large gatherings and maintain public order. However, the overuse of Section 163of the BNSS, which is the equivalent of Section 144 of the CrPC, especially in situations where no immediate threat to law and order exists, raises serious concerns about the state’s willingness to uphold democratic rights.

In his public statements, Wangchuk expressed his deep disappointment in the state’s actions, calling it “a sad day for democracy.” He rightly pointed out that Section163 of the BNSS, in its original intent, is meant to be a temporary measure invoked only in exceptional situations. Its permanent imposition in New Delhi’s district, as reported by Wangchuk, is contrary to the democratic spirit of the country and a clear violation of the rights guaranteed under Article 19.

Wangchuk’s protest, which had been a silent fast to “Save Ladakh, Save Himalayas,” was not only a call for statehood and special constitutional protections for Ladakh but also a broader critique of the government’s failure to engage constructively with marginalised communities. The imposition of force against non-violent demonstrators represents an alarming trend in India, where peaceful protests are increasingly met with state-sanctioned repression.

The push for Ladakh’s inclusion in the Sixth Schedule

At the core of Wangchuk’s protest is the demand for Ladakh’s inclusion in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. This inclusion would grant the regions indigenous and tribal communities’ greater autonomy over their land, resources, and cultural identity. Following the abrogation of Article 370, Ladakh has been left in a vulnerable position, and the local population fears the loss of their traditional rights. Wangchuk, along with the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance, has been advocating for statehood, the establishment of a public service commission for Ladakh, and separate Lok Sabha seats for Leh and Kargil districts.

The group’s demands are not new—they have been persistently pushing for these changes ever since Ladakh was carved out as a Union Territory in 2019. Wangchuk’s march from Leh to Delhi, which culminated in the current protest, is an attempt to draw the attention of top leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, to these critical issues. However, instead of engaging in dialogue, the government’s response has been to suppress the movement through detentions and legal manoeuvres. (Detailed reports may be read here and here)

 A pattern of state overreach

The detainment of Wangchuk and his supporters on October 13 was not their first encounter with the police. On September 30, while marching to Delhi from Leh, the group was detained at the Singhu border by the Delhi Police and only released on the night of October 2. This repeated use of force against peaceful demonstrators is emblematic of a larger pattern of state overreach. In a democracy, peaceful dissent is a vital component of governance, but the state’s response in these instances appears to be aimed at stifling the voices of those who challenge its authority.

The Delhi High Court is now involved, with the Leh Apex Body filing a petition seeking permission for the protesters to hold a peaceful demonstration at Jantar Mantar. The court has ordered responses from the Delhi Police and the government by October 16, with a hearing scheduled for October 22. This legal battle will serve as a litmus test for the judiciary’s role in safeguarding democratic freedoms.

The erosion of democratic values

Wangchuk’s hunger strike and the protest outside Ladakh Bhawan highlight the deepening crisis in Indian democracy. The increasing use of legal provisions like Section 163 of the BNSS to stifle dissent, the detainment of peaceful protesters, and the state’s refusal to engage with legitimate demands all point to a dangerous erosion of democratic values. The right to peaceful assembly and free expression is at the core of any democratic society. When the state repeatedly undermines these rights, it signals a move towards authoritarianism, where dissent is treated as a threat rather than a vital component of governance.

Wangchuk’s statement that the detentions were not only “sad for us but sad for democracy” underscores the gravity of the situation. By silencing those who peacefully express their concerns, the state is effectively turning its back on the very constitutional principles it is meant to uphold. Instead of finalising a meeting with Wangchuk and hearing the citizens of India out regarding their demands, the union government is focussing on trampling their constitutional rights.

The detention of Sonam Wangchuk and his supporters is more than just an isolated event—it is a symptom of a broader problem in India’s democratic framework. The struggle for Ladakh’s inclusion in the Sixth Schedule, the demand for statehood, and the protection of tribal rights are all legitimate issues that deserve attention, not suppression. As India continues to navigate its complex political landscape, it must remember that the true strength of its democracy lies in its ability to tolerate, respect, and engage with dissent. When the state instead resorts to detentions and force, it is not just choking individual rights but on the very foundations of democracy itself.

Related:

Delhi Chalo padyatra: Sonam Wangchuk begins indefinite fast at Ladakh Bhawan

When the state turns rogue even protests dry up, Salutes & Apologies Professor Saibaba!

Major need for reform in information commissions: RTI report card on the performance, 2023-24

“Hungry Cannot Wait”: SC sets final deadline for Ration Cards to Migrant Workers

Assam detention camps tighten rules, leaving families struggling to visit loved ones detained in Matia transit camp

The post Crushing voices: The detention of Sonam Wangchuk and supporters at Ladakh Bhawan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Background

On September 9, 2024, Sonam Wangchuk, a well-known climate activist and innovator, made a compelling appeal to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to include Ladakh in the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. This provision would grant law-making powers to local leaders, aiming to protect Ladakh’s unique land and cultural identity amid increasing external pressures and environmental challenges. Wangchuk’s request reflects a broader movement in Ladakh advocating for greater autonomy and the preservation of its distinct heritage.

Historical and Political Context

The abrogation of Article 370: In August 2019, the Indian government abrogated Article 370, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, including Ladakh. This move led to the bifurcation of the region into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir, with a legislature, and Ladakh, without one. The initial excitement in Leh over the announcement quickly dissipated as it became clear that Ladakh was not included in the Sixth Schedule, leading to widespread disappointment and the formation of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) to advocate for greater protections.

Recommendations and government committees: In September 2019, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes recommended including Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule to protect the region’s tribal culture and land rights. This recommendation was based on the high percentage of Scheduled Tribes in Ladakh and the need for safeguarding against outside land purchases.

In response to ongoing protests, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) established a high-powered committee in January 2023, led by Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai, to address key issues in Ladakh. However, progress has been slow, and by April 2024, Union Home Minister Amit Shah indicated that the prospects for Ladakh achieving Sixth Schedule status or statehood were unlikely. This led to increased frustration among Ladakhi leaders and residents.

The foot march initiative

Launch of the march: The padyatra, or foot march, commenced on September 1, 2024, from Leh, with Wangchuk and around 75 volunteers embarking on a journey to New Delhi. This march is not only a physical trek but a symbolic act of resistance and advocacy. The participants aim to urge the central government to resume discussions with Ladakh’s leadership and address their longstanding demands. Wangchuk and his team are covering approximately 25 kilometres each day, enduring the challenging terrain and weather conditions of the high-altitude regions. The march is set to continue until October 2, Gandhi Jayanti, when they hope to reach the national capital and present their demands directly to the government.

Past engagements and government response: Wangchuk highlighted that despite submitting a detailed memorandum of demands to the Prime Minister during his visit to Dras for Kargil Vijay Diwas in July, he had yet to receive a response. This memorandum included calls for inclusion under the Sixth Schedule, which Wangchuk argues is crucial for Ladakh’s ecological and cultural preservation. (Detailed reports can be read here, here, and here.)

It is essential to note that recently, the government announced the creation of five new districts in Ladakh: Zanskar, Drass, Sham, Nubra, and Changthang. Wangchuk and his supporters have expressed concerns about whether these districts will be granted real decision-making powers or merely function as administrative units. The creation of these districts could be viewed as a response to ongoing protests, but the real test will be if they align with the demands for autonomy under the Sixth Schedule. 

The march’s objectives and demands

Four-point agenda: The ongoing padyatra is organised by the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), which have been advocating for-

1. Statehood for Ladakh: The demand for Ladakh to be granted statehood to allow greater self-governance.
2. Constitutional Protections under the Sixth Schedule: Inclusion under the Sixth Schedule to protect tribal and cultural rights.
3. Public Service Commission: The establishment of a Public Service Commission to oversee recruitment and administration in Ladakh.
4. Separate Lok Sabha Seats: Creation of separate parliamentary constituencies for Leh and Kargil to ensure better representation.

The padyatra has received support from various sections of society, including retired soldiers, women, and the elderly. Former Jammu and Kashmir Governor Satya Pal Malik has announced his intention to join the march in October 2024. This growing support highlights the widespread discontent and desire for greater autonomy among Ladakhis.

Furthermore, Ladakh faces significant ecological challenges due to its fragile environment and the impacts of climate change. Wangchuk has repeatedly stressed the region’s vulnerability, which is exacerbated by industrial activities. He argues that the Sixth Schedule is essential to safeguard the region from exploitative practices and preserve its environmental and cultural integrity.

The inclusion of Ladakh in the Sixth Schedule is also seen as a measure to protect the cultural identity of its tribal communities. The region is home to several tribal groups, including the Balti, Beda, Bot, Brokpa, Drokpa, Changpa, Garra, Mon, and Purigpa. These communities face risks from outside influences that could threaten their traditional ways of life.

Future Outlook

The outcome of this extensive march remains uncertain. The ongoing political attention in Jammu and Kashmir and the ongoing elections could overshadow Ladakh’s demands. However, the march serves as a powerful demonstration of the region’s determination to secure its rights and autonomy. As the padyatra progresses toward Delhi, the participants hope to bring their concerns to the national stage and urge the central government to address their demands effectively.

Related:

Why is Ladakh Protesting?

Section 144, internet suspension imposed ahead of Ladakh’s Pashmina March, march to continue

Fulfill Promises Made To People Of Ladakh: Sonam Wangchuk In Fresh Appeal To Modi

Agitation Likely To Intensify In Ladakh: KDA Calls For Half-Day Strike In Kargil Today

The post Ladakh’s fight for autonomy: Sonam Wangchuk leads foot march to Delhi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Except for the cooperation sought for the GST amendment, the NDA government’s actions have not been representative of respect to federal principles, seeking cooperation of states indicated by the recent dispute between the State of Kerala and the Centre. The new addition to this pattern of not paying much heed to regional aspirations is the instance of Ladakh.

After the abrogation of Article 370, the Union reorganised the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union territories – Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh. Immediately after the reorganisation, the people of Ladakh had showed optimism about the region’s future and its development which until then was under the control of power in Srinagar. The Union Territory of Ladakh consists of Leh and Kargil. Leh is a Buddhist majority district while Kargil is a Muslim majority one. Ladakh MP Jamyang Tsering Namgyal briefly became a national face of the fact that people of Leh Ladakh region supported the abrogation – with his speech on Lok Sabha. Notably, he has been replaced by Tashi Gyalson for the Ladakh BJP MP candidature this time in 2024. According to a report in The Hindu, JT Namgyal and his supporters are unhappy with this change but he stands by the party and its ideology!

Ladakh is seeing protests against the centre’s undue control of the region with the prominent educationist and the award-winning engineer Sonam Wangchuk becoming the face of this agitation, demanding constitutional safeguards under the sixth schedule and statehood for Ladakh. The protests for statehood and inclusion of the region into the Sixth Schedule are being carried out by a collaboration between two bodies – Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Development Council (KDC). While protests have been on since January, the fractured and divided media only began reflecting this unique form of resistance in late March and April 2024.

It was reported in March 2024 that the Union Home Minister Amit Shah told the LAB –during negotiations before the protests were re-launched– that Sixth Schedule inclusion might not be possible but Article 371 like provisions could be made for the region of Ladakh. In this article, we shall discuss the protections accorded to areas under the Sixth Schedule and Article 371, and why Ladakh is protesting for it.

Under the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council Act, 1997, Autonomous district councils were constituted with powers on economic development, healthcare, education, land use, taxation and local governance. The Leh Autonomous Hill Development Council came into existence in 1997 while the Kargil AHDC came into existence in 2003. These councils do not have legislative but executive powers of these subjects.

What is the Sixth Schedule?

The Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution governs tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram: Administration: These areas are autonomous districts or such districts further divided into autonomous regions under the state’s executive authority. Autonomous Districts and Regions: Administered by District and Regional Councils determined by the Governor. Councils: Each District Council has up to 30 members, with four nominated by the Governor and the rest elected. Legislative Powers: Councils can make laws on specified matters like land and forest management. Tribal Interests: Protects tribal land and resources, prohibits their transfer to non-tribal groups, and safeguards tribal communities’ cultural identities.

What is Article 371?

Article 371 deals with special provisions for States of Maharashtra and Gujarat with bestowing responsibility on the Governor on the aforementioned states to establish separate developments boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada and rest of the state for Maharashtra, and similar boards for Saurashtra and Kutch and rest of the state for Gujarat. These responsibilities cover equitable allocation of funds for development expenditure, providing adequate facilities for technical education and vocational training, and adequate opportunities for employment in services under the control of the State Government. Later, as the negotiations between different states and unions continued in Independent India, 371A to 371J covering Nagaland, Assam, Manipur, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, Sikkim, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa and Karnataka were added. For example, for Nagaland, governed by 371A, the provision is that no act of parliament in respect of religious or social practices of the Nagas, customary Naga law and procedure, administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law, ownership and transfer of land and its resources shall apply to the state of Nagaland unless the legislative assembly of the state decides so by a resolution.

Why is Ladakh protesting for Statehood?

Before the abrogation of Article 370, Ladakh used to send four legislators to the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly. However, after the region has been converted into a Union Territory, the only representative from the region is the Lok Sabha member from the region. Given that there is no representation, and that the administration is carried with New Delhi as the focal point, there is no adequate say – according to those who are protesting – in development projects announced in the region.

With statehood and a legislative assembly, there will be greater and deeper democracy in the state. It is feared that due to the rich mineral resources present in the region, big corporations which are not from Ladakh will come to Ladakh and Ladakh will not have a say in how those resources should be mined in tandem with the environmental requirements in the region whereas the centre will have a greater say since Ladakh is a union territory.

While the Congress has stated in its manifesto that it will include the 6th schedule to include the tribal areas of Ladakh, people of Ladakh will have to wait till June 4, 2024 to see if it has to fight with BJP as it is doing now or to negotiate with Congress for its statehood.

(The author is part of the legal research team in the organisation)

The post Why is Ladakh Protesting? appeared first on SabrangIndia.