The controversy surrounding the Subansiri Upper Hydroelectric Project (SUHEP) public hearing reflects growing unease over the integrity of consultation processes in large infrastructure projects in Arunachal. The Subansiri Upper Hydroelectric Project Land Affected People’s Forum (SUHEP-LAPF) has called for a fresh hearing, alleging violations of the EIA Notification 2006 and claiming that project-affected people were denied entry during the 24 March meeting at Singhik Hall. Reports of excluded representatives, including student leaders and members of downstream forums, raise serious questions about whether all stakeholders were truly given a voice.
Allegations of bias further deepen the controversy. The forum claims that only pro-project voices were allowed to participate, with barricades and a strong police presence preventing dissenters from entering, creating an atmosphere of fear. It also alleges that legal provisions were invoked to restrict opposition. In contrast, the government and project authorities maintain that the hearing, conducted by NHPC Limited and the Arunachal Pradesh Pollution Control Board under district supervision, was transparent and inclusive. Officials have assured fair compensation and support under existing laws, while local leaders stress that residents are not anti-dam but are seeking fair benefits, employment opportunities, and revisions in agreements.
The competing narratives – of transparency on one hand and exclusion on the other – suggest that something is not entirely right. For a project of this scale, procedural compliance alone is not enough; genuine inclusiveness and trust-building are essential. Without that, such hearings risk becoming formalities, rather than meaningful platforms for democratic engagement.