Raising ecological concerns not "negative politics": Jairam Ramesh critisises Bhupender Yadav over Great Nicobar Project

New Delhi [India], September 21 (ANI): Congress leader Jairam Ramesh on Sunday accused the Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav of ignoring serious environmental and tribal concerns over the Great Nicobar Mega Infrastructure Project, and said that raising these issues is not "negative politics" but an expression of grave concern.
Ramesh said that it violates the National Forest Policy by diverting lakhs of trees and calling the proposed compensatory afforestation in Haryana a poor and inadequate substitute for the island's unique old-growth forests.
In a post on X, Jairam Ramesh wrote, "The Union Minister of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change Shri Bhupender Yadav has accused the Indian National Congress of doing what he calls "negative politics" on the Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project. Drawing the nation's attention to an imminent ecological and humanitarian disaster is NOT "negative politics." It is an expression of grave concern."

The Union Minister of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change Shri Bhupender Yadav has accused the Indian National Congress of doing what he calls "negative politics" on the Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project.

Drawing the nation's attention to an imminent ecological and… pic.twitter.com/nj67Lz271c

— Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) September 21, 2025

"The Minister is simply unable to answer basic questions that the INC has been repeatedly raising on the project -Doesn't the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project - which requires the diversion of lakhs of trees - violate the National Forest Policy, 1988 which states that "tropical rain/moist forests, particularly in areas ...Andaman & Nicobar Islands should be totally safeguarded" Compensatory afforestation is always a poor substitute for old-growth forests - but the afforestation planned in this project is farcical. How can afforestation in distant Haryana, with a completely different ecosystem, be considered a genuine offset for the loss of old-growth rainforest unique to Great Nicobar? Why has the Government of Haryana already freed up 25% of this land for mining instead of reserving it for the afforestation?" the post read.
The Congress leader also said that tribal bodies and the Shompen community were not consulted, and warning that the project could threaten endangered species and violate the Forest Rights Act.

"Why was the National Commission on Scheduled Tribes not consulted before the Nicobar project was approved? Why are the concerns of the Tribal Council of Great Nicobar regarding this project being ignored? Why is the Shompen Policy of the Islands, which explicitly calls for the integrity of the community to be prioritized in all projects, being disregarded? Why does the "Social Impact Assessment" conducted as part of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR) ignore the existence of the Shompen and the Nicobarese? The Forest Rights Act (2006) holds the Shompen as the sole legally empowered authority to protect, preserve, regulate, and manage the tribal reserve. Why does the Project's approval process fail to recognize the same? The island harbours endangered species including leatherback turtles, megapodes, saltwater crocodiles, and rich coral systems. Won't this project drive these species closer to extinction?" the post read.
Ramesh questioned the transparency and safety of the project, asking why key documents were not made public and whether the project is sustainable given the island's history of tsunamis and high seismic activity.
"Why are critical documents relating to this project - including the reports of the ground-truthing exercise conducted to reclassify the location of the planned transshipment port from CRZ1-A - not being published in the open? Given the island's history of severe subsidence during the 2004 tsunami and its location in a high-seismic zone, can the sustainability of this project be assured? Over twenty years ago, a valuable book was published. It was called "Supreme Court on Forest Conservation" and it was authored by Ritwick Dutta and Bhupender Yadav. Sadly the first author has had investigative agencies unleashed against him for his environmental activism - but happily the second author has had a much better fate. When will that Bhupender Yadav awake?" the post further read. (ANI)