The project to develop infrastructure on the Great Nicobar island conforms to environmental rules and does not harm the tribal Shompen community, Union minister Bhupender Yadav claimed, according to The Indian Express.
The environment minister on August 21 responded to a letter that Congress MP Jairam Ramesh wrote to him on August 10.
The Congress leader had called for suspending clearances to the project, citing the diversion of forest land, threats to the Shompen – an indigenous community classified as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group – and concerns about the infrastructure being set up in an earthquake-prone region.
The infrastructure project involves the construction of a trans-shipment port, an international airport, a power plant, a township and tourism infrastructure spread over more than 160 square kilometres of land. The project, expected to cost Rs 72,000 crore, was granted final environmental clearance on November 4, 2022.
Yadav said on August 21 that the approvals to the project were consistent with the Van Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan Adhiniyam, 1980, the Hindustan Times reported.
“Despite diversion of forest land for the project, 82% of area in the Great Nicobar continues to be under protected forests, eco-sensitive zones and biosphere reserves,” the environment minister said. “…This is much more than laid down norms of maintaining two-thirds of the area under forest cover.”
Ramesh, in his letter on August 10, said that the project would require 15% of the island’s area, or 13,075 hectares of land, to be diverted to set up infrastructure. Compensatory afforestation would be “no substitute whatsoever” for the loss of natural biodiversity-rich forests, he contended.
Further, the Congress leader, who was the environment minister from 2009 to 2011, said that the compensatory afforestation was being planned thousands of kilometres away in a vastly different ecology.
In response to these points, Yadav said that the government plans to carry out compensatory afforestation for the Great Nicobar project in Haryana, Madhya Pradesh or states adjoining to the National Capital Region. He said that this was because areas for plantation were not available on the Great Nicobar island itself.
The minister further contended planting native species of trees in non-notified forest land “in arid landscape and in the vicinity of urban areas” would be of greater ecological value, according to the Hindustan Times.
Yadav claimed that the National Green Tribunal, in an order from April in which it set up a High-Powered Committee to examine clearances for the project, had not made any statement about parts of the proposed infrastructure falling under Coastal Regulatory Zone IA, which refers to eco-sensitive areas, according to The Indian Express.
However, the tribunal had said in its order: “It is also shown that part of the project is in the CRZ IA area where port is prohibited.”
Yadav said that reports of the High-Powered Committee were not made public because the Great Nicobar project was one of “national importance with strategic and defence dimensions”.
Also read: A new book of essays highlights the ways ‘development projects’ in Nicobar will endanger the island
Jairam Ramesh, in his letter, said that the project could “potentially result in the genocide of the Shompen” and that the tribal council of the islands was not adequately consulted as was legally required. To this, Yadav said that an Empowered Committee comprising government officials and anthropologists had “clearly stated that the interests of tribal population especially Shompen…will not be affected adversely and that the displacement of tribals would not be allowed.”
According to Yadav, the Empowered Committee had said that the only habitation of the tribal Shompen and Nicobarese communities in the project region was at New Chingen, Rajiv Nagar, and that authorities were not proposing to displace any tribal habitations.
The environment minister claimed that “no objections were raised” to the project during the statutory period laid down in the forest protection law, the Hindustan Times reported.
On concerns about the project being planned in an earthquake-prone area, the minister said that according to seismologists, the possibility of an earthquake as major as the one in 2004 – which measured 9.2 on the Richter Scale – was low for now. However, he did not cite any scientific study to support the claim.
“Seismologists suggest a Return Period of 420-750 years for mega-earthquakes similar to that which occurred in 2004,” Yadav said.