Jairam Ramesh writes to Bhupender Yadav over lack of transparency on Nicobar project

Jairam Ramesh, a senior member of the Indian Parliament representing the Congress party, has raised serious concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding the Great Nicobar Island Project. In a recent letter addressed to Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, Ramesh criticized the minister's defense of the project as "disappointing and unsatisfactory." His remarks come amid ongoing disputes over the environmental safeguards and the secrecy surrounding the High-Powered Committee (HPC) report related to the proposed transshipment port on the island. This exchange marks the latest chapter in a long-standing debate that has persisted for over a year, during which Ramesh has consistently questioned the adequacy of the project's environmental impact assessments.

Ramesh's critique follows a letter from Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav dated June 13, which served as a response to Ramesh's earlier communication on June 3. The minister emphasized the role of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in clearing the way for the project. On February 16, 2026, an NGT bench ruled that there was "no good ground to interfere" with the project due to its "strategic importance" and other relevant factors. The tribunal directed authorities to ensure "full and strict compliance of EC conditions," and it accepted the government's position on maintaining the confidentiality of the HPC report.

The Great Nicobar Island Project, valued at approximately ₹81,000 crore, includes the construction of an international container transshipment port at Galathea Bay, along with an airport, a power plant, and a greenfield township. The project is expected to involve the felling of nearly a million trees and construction on a leatherback turtle nesting site, leading to significant environmental concerns. These issues have drawn sustained criticism regarding the ecological footprint of the project and the potential impact on the rights of the Shompen, a particularly vulnerable tribal group residing on the island.

Ramesh argued that the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) conducted for the project were "demonstrably inadequate and fall woefully short of guidelines set by" the Ministry itself. He pointed out that six-monthly compliance reports had not been published since March 2024, and conservation and mitigation plans prepared by institutions such as the Wildlife Institute of India and the Zoological Survey of India remained inaccessible to the public. Some of the proposed mitigation measures, including the "large-scale relocation of coral colonies," were described as "clearly unrealistic and almost impossible."

In his letter, Ramesh contended that the clearance granted to the project had been "granted prematurely and hastily." Despite acknowledging the strategic significance of the project, he maintained that this should not serve as a justification for the lack of transparency. Ramesh asserted that the information he sought would not hinder the fulfillment of the project's strategic objectives but rather contribute to ensuring accountability and adherence to environmental standards.

The controversy surrounding the Great Nicobar Island Project highlights the tension between developmental ambitions and environmental protection. As discussions continue, stakeholders will likely scrutinize the balance between economic growth and ecological sustainability, with the outcome potentially influencing future projects in ecologically sensitive areas.