Monday Musing
[ Tongam Rina ]
In popular mainstream culture, Sonam Wangchuk is known as the inspiration behind a cult Bollywood film. In the Himalayan region, however, he is recognised as an environmentalist working closely with local communities in Ladakh to find solutions to their pressing ecological challenges. An inspiration to many indigenous environmentalists who genuinely care about the fragile ecology of the Himalayas and who dare to question the government over its poorly conceived projects, Wangchuk is now in jail for seeking rights for Ladakh and its people. No one knows for how long.
The National Security Act allows for the detention of an accused person for up to 12 months. No questions asked. The Act has often been used to target those deemed ‘dangerous’ – a category that can include people who seek to assert the rights of citizens. Sonam Wangchuk is one such person.
Gitanjali J Angmo, Wangchuk’s wife, has approached the Supreme Court, challenging her husband’s detention, with the next hearing scheduled for 7 January. Wangchuk’s leadership of a movement -along with the people of Ladakh – seeking constitutionally guaranteed rights is well documented, but such realities appear to carry little weight in the eyes of the law.
While the court will take its time, it is not difficult to assume that the Centre has made an example of Wangchuk to demonstrate the consequences of defying an increasingly authoritarian BJP system of governance. He is not an exception. For anyone who challenges the Centre’s plans, jail has become the designated destination. This serves as a warning to ensure that no one steps out of line against a government that is both all-powerful and pervasive.
But why should anyone be jailed for exercising rights that are both legitimate and constitutional?
The troubling and frightening aspect of the current dispensation is its willingness to silence anyone who dares to raise uncomfortable questions that do not align with its political ideology – often divisive and rooted in right-wing, majoritarian Hindutva. Jammu and Kashmir was stripped of its autonomy through the abrogation of Article 370, and the state was split into two union territories. Ladakh was left without a legislative assembly in 2019.
People were left with numerous unfulfilled promises, waiting for years for them to be fulfilled.
In 2025, the Centre continues to exploit the region’s resources, leaving a union territory still without a legislature and high unemployment, while its most outspoken representative remains in jail.
What makes this situation even more ironic is that Sonam Wangchuk had initially supported the union government’s decision when many others questioned the motives behind the bifurcation of the state. Years later, however, he has become a target for demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh. When public discontent becomes too volatile, the Centre may choose to concede to some demands, but Centre also believes that people’s anger can be suppressed through abuse of power, threats, and intimidation. What the Centre fails to recognise is that this approach is dangerous, particularly in a sensitive border region like Ladakh, which faces a unique and complex set of challenges.
As a union territory without a legislature, Ladakh is governed directly by the Home Affairs Ministry through a lieutenant governor, with little to no say for the local population. This effectively signals that the Government of India does not trust Ladakhis to govern their own affairs – all in the name of national security. If people living in border regions are denied a voice in their own governance, it is pertinent to ask what kind of stability the government truly expects to achieve.
This distrust of border regions is not new. Arunachal Pradesh, for instance, elects its own government, yet significant powers related to security are vested in the governor under Article 371(H), rather than in the elected state government – an arrangement that exists nowhere else in India. In Arunachal, the governor is not merely a figurehead but wields real authority, meaning the Centre ultimately decides on all critical matters, again in the name of national security.
The Centre’s reluctance to grant Sixth Schedule status stems from the fact that it empowers people to protect their land, culture, and resources. Such protections would restrict the Centre’s ability to push large-scale infrastructure projects under the banner of national interest. Much of the infrastructure development across the Himalayan region is not designed primarily for local communities but to serve broader strategic objectives and contractors.
Sonam Wangchuk seeks to empower people to have control over their own resources and to give the people of Ladakh a voice – and that, it appears, is unacceptable to the BJP government.
