Arunachal Pradesh
Upper Siang, Dibang, Siang, Subansiri, Lohit river basins
,
Geku
,
Siang, East Siang, Upper Siang, Dibang valley and West Siang
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Mega resistance against proposals for 12 hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
150000
People Affected
1972
Year started
Land area affected
Households affected
150000
People Affected
1972
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Hydroelectric Project
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Massive protests began in several parts of Arunachal Pradesh, especially in Siang and Dibang valley, soon after the signing of memorandums of agreement (MoA) between the state government and hydropower PSUs for 12 stalled hydropower projects in the state. 

The 12 stalled hydropower projects have a cumulative installed capacity of about 11,523 MW. According to a press release, out of these 12 projects, five projects of 2,620 MW have been allocated by the state Government to North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (NEEPCO), five projects of 5,097 MW to Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. (SJVN) and the remaining two projects of capacity 3,800 MW to National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC).

While the Tato-II HEP (700 MW), the Tato-I HEP (186 MW), the Heo HEP (240 MW), the Naying HEP (1,000 MW) and the Hirong HEP (500 MW) have been allotted to the NEEPCO, the Etalin HEP (3,097 MW), the Attunli HEP (680 MW), the Emini HEP (500 MW), the Amulin HEP (420 MW) and the Mihumdon HEP (400 MW) have been given to the SJVN. The Subansiri Upper HEP (2,000 MW) and the Subansiri Middle (Kamala) HEP (1,800 MW) have been allotted to the NHPC.

These projects were earlier entrusted upon private sector developers about 15 years ago, but they remained non-starters due to myriad of reasons. The state government, therefore, decided to rope in central hydro PSUs to give a push to the languishing projects.

Arunachal Pradesh’s Power Commissioner, Ankur Garg, signed the agreements with the heads of the three CPSUs on behalf of the state government in Itanagar in the presence of Power and New and Renewable Energy Minister, R K Singh, State Chief Minister Pema Khandu, and his Deputy CM Chowna Mein.

Water resources experts said that the 12 power projects in Arunachal Pradesh that were officially handed over to three Central public sector undertakings (CPSUs) on August 12 are economically unviable. In 2022, Environment researcher Chintan Sheth said that in Northeast India, infrastructural development can lead to large-scale loss of natural ecosystems including secondary forests and bamboo growth, which in turn can lead to loss of carbon sequestration areas. 

There is a constant fear among the indigenous communities, both in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, that mega projects like these would wreck havoc and submerge the downstream areas. One of the protesters said, "We will shed our blood to protect our land if the government pursues with their plans. We are not giving up on our land. We are more disappointed with the Arunachal Government's forceful power project approvals since 2013. This is gross injustice. No consultation, No PFR, No survey, No dam!"

A senior community member, from the Mebo sub-division, was quoted as saying, "We had a public meeting for the dams and Forest Conservation Act with all the village heads, public leaders, senior citizens and Panchayati Raj Institution members. We have also held a resolution in the meeting that recently, in the Parliament, the Forest Conservation Act was passed, and we stand against such amendments because its completely against our tribes and tribal lands. We demand the Government to take it back. We totally oppose the government's plan to construct mega dam of 10,000 MW on Siang. The government intends to retain China's mega power project dam of 60,000 MW with these dams. It really makes no sense and appears impossible. We are the landowners. Is it not important to get our consent prior to such decisions? Before pursuing such ambitious projects, the governments should look back in the history and see the series of disasters that brought chaos to the land and human lives"

Since 2022, environmental activists, advocates and graffiti artists were detained by the police on multiple occasions for their artistic and peaceful protests against rampant increase in dam construction in the state.

On 14 September 2023, more than 7,000 people gathered at Geku Village, Upper Siang to take oath against the proposed 10,000 MW Siang Dam. Adi Miri, the Priest, Shaman initiated the oath during the anti-dam meeting at Geku, Upper Siang. 

An Assam-based hydrologist, who did not want to be named, said these projects should not have been taken up in the first place. “Apart from being unviable, these guarantee disaster for Arunachal Pradesh and downstream regions in Assam,” he said.

Manohar Lal, Union Minister of Power and Housing & Urban Affairs, on July 8, 2024, on his visit highlighted Arunachal Pradesh's significant hydropower potential, amounting to about 38% (approximately 50 GW) of India's total. This represents the highest potential among all states in the country. On the same day, activist lawyer Ebo Mili and Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) convener Dunge Apang were detained by the state government. They were released after over 10 hours of detention after signing a Rs 50,000 bond to keep peace until one year or the completion of ongoing inquiry.

During a review of ongoing hydropower projects in the state, discussions centered on the availability of land for Compensatory Afforestation necessary for advancing hydropower projects. Simplifying the process for new connections and making electricity bills more consumer-friendly were also emphasized. Discussions also focused on hydropower generation, transmission, and distribution sectors, highlighting clean energy production and addressing transmission sector challenges and operational maintenance.

India plans to invest $1 billion to rapidly develop 12 hydropower stations in Arunachal Pradesh, a move that may escalate tensions with China. The initiative, supported by the federal finance ministry, aims to facilitate state government involvement in regulatory clearances and local rehabilitation and is expected to be officially announced in the 2024/2025 federal budget. The federal finance ministry has greenlit up to 7.5 billion rupees ($89.85 million) in financial aid for each project. The initiative aims to support northeastern states and expedite regulatory approvals and local rehabilitations. This development is part of broader infrastructure enhancements near the contested border with China.

Expressing concern over the region's vulnerability to natural disasters, the Northeast Human Rights (NEHR) pointed to scientific studies indicating the highly susceptible nature of the South Lhonak Lake to GLOFs. The organization stressed that despite consistent warnings from scientific communities, local activists, and indigenous research organizations, the potential risks of mega-dam projects have not been adequately addressed.

“The deputy commissioner of Siang asked us not to oppose the dam,” said Tarok Siram, the headman of Parong village. “I told him to take the opinion of 116 families in my village. I pointed out that the homes of 43 families will be under water if the dam is built here. The remaining families will have to be relocated.”

The mega power project will submerge the ancestral lands of the Adi community, including the district headquarters of Upper Siang district, Yingkiong, say activists.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

4

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 107

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Details of Sources: Bhanu Tatak, Dibang Resistance, Alifa Zibran Names of Accused: Ebo Mili, Mejo Mihu, Nilim Mahanta

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Water bodies, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

126000

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia

Arunachal Pradesh

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Rajasthan
Rajasthan

UIT Bikaner's Jorbeer Housing Project on Stalls Following Rajasthan High Court Order

Rajasthan
Rajasthan

Jaipur Development Authority Acquires Land for Township Project, Ending Conflict

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Farmers land acquired under Mansarovar Housing Scheme in Lucknow

Maharashtra
Maharashtra

Citizens unite against cycle track around Powai, Vihar Lakes in Mumbai

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Families displaced by Mandal Dam in Jharkhand opppose project resumption

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Jharkhand approves Adani's thermal plant, farmers allege violation of LARR Act

Gujarat
Gujarat

Pastoral Community in Gujarat's Banni Grasslands Demands Titles Recognising Community Forest Rights

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Builder Encroaches Upon Farmers Land in Gosaiganj Lucknow, 150 Allottees in Lurch

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Mega resistance against proposals for 12 hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh

Reported by

East Street Journal Asia

Legal Review by

Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Updated by

East Street Journal Asia

Published on

December 21, 2023

August 21, 2024

Edited on

August 20, 2024

December 21, 2023

Sector

Power

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Hydroelectric Project

Environmental/ecological damage, Floods in the downstream areas

Starting Year

1972

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

People Affected by Conflict

150000

State

Arunachal Pradesh

Sector

Power

People Affected by Conflict

150000

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

1972

Location of Conflict

Geku

Upper Siang, Dibang, Siang, Subansiri, Lohit river basins

Siang, East Siang, Upper Siang, Dibang valley and West Siang

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Hydroelectric Project

Environmental/ecological damage, Floods in the downstream areas

Land Conflict Summary

Massive protests began in several parts of Arunachal Pradesh, especially in Siang and Dibang valley, soon after the signing of memorandums of agreement (MoA) between the state government and hydropower PSUs for 12 stalled hydropower projects in the state. 

The 12 stalled hydropower projects have a cumulative installed capacity of about 11,523 MW. According to a press release, out of these 12 projects, five projects of 2,620 MW have been allocated by the state Government to North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (NEEPCO), five projects of 5,097 MW to Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. (SJVN) and the remaining two projects of capacity 3,800 MW to National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC).

While the Tato-II HEP (700 MW), the Tato-I HEP (186 MW), the Heo HEP (240 MW), the Naying HEP (1,000 MW) and the Hirong HEP (500 MW) have been allotted to the NEEPCO, the Etalin HEP (3,097 MW), the Attunli HEP (680 MW), the Emini HEP (500 MW), the Amulin HEP (420 MW) and the Mihumdon HEP (400 MW) have been given to the SJVN. The Subansiri Upper HEP (2,000 MW) and the Subansiri Middle (Kamala) HEP (1,800 MW) have been allotted to the NHPC.

These projects were earlier entrusted upon private sector developers about 15 years ago, but they remained non-starters due to myriad of reasons. The state government, therefore, decided to rope in central hydro PSUs to give a push to the languishing projects.

Arunachal Pradesh’s Power Commissioner, Ankur Garg, signed the agreements with the heads of the three CPSUs on behalf of the state government in Itanagar in the presence of Power and New and Renewable Energy Minister, R K Singh, State Chief Minister Pema Khandu, and his Deputy CM Chowna Mein.

Water resources experts said that the 12 power projects in Arunachal Pradesh that were officially handed over to three Central public sector undertakings (CPSUs) on August 12 are economically unviable. In 2022, Environment researcher Chintan Sheth said that in Northeast India, infrastructural development can lead to large-scale loss of natural ecosystems including secondary forests and bamboo growth, which in turn can lead to loss of carbon sequestration areas. 

There is a constant fear among the indigenous communities, both in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, that mega projects like these would wreck havoc and submerge the downstream areas. One of the protesters said, "We will shed our blood to protect our land if the government pursues with their plans. We are not giving up on our land. We are more disappointed with the Arunachal Government's forceful power project approvals since 2013. This is gross injustice. No consultation, No PFR, No survey, No dam!"

A senior community member, from the Mebo sub-division, was quoted as saying, "We had a public meeting for the dams and Forest Conservation Act with all the village heads, public leaders, senior citizens and Panchayati Raj Institution members. We have also held a resolution in the meeting that recently, in the Parliament, the Forest Conservation Act was passed, and we stand against such amendments because its completely against our tribes and tribal lands. We demand the Government to take it back. We totally oppose the government's plan to construct mega dam of 10,000 MW on Siang. The government intends to retain China's mega power project dam of 60,000 MW with these dams. It really makes no sense and appears impossible. We are the landowners. Is it not important to get our consent prior to such decisions? Before pursuing such ambitious projects, the governments should look back in the history and see the series of disasters that brought chaos to the land and human lives"

Since 2022, environmental activists, advocates and graffiti artists were detained by the police on multiple occasions for their artistic and peaceful protests against rampant increase in dam construction in the state.

On 14 September 2023, more than 7,000 people gathered at Geku Village, Upper Siang to take oath against the proposed 10,000 MW Siang Dam. Adi Miri, the Priest, Shaman initiated the oath during the anti-dam meeting at Geku, Upper Siang. 

An Assam-based hydrologist, who did not want to be named, said these projects should not have been taken up in the first place. “Apart from being unviable, these guarantee disaster for Arunachal Pradesh and downstream regions in Assam,” he said.

Manohar Lal, Union Minister of Power and Housing & Urban Affairs, on July 8, 2024, on his visit highlighted Arunachal Pradesh's significant hydropower potential, amounting to about 38% (approximately 50 GW) of India's total. This represents the highest potential among all states in the country. On the same day, activist lawyer Ebo Mili and Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) convener Dunge Apang were detained by the state government. They were released after over 10 hours of detention after signing a Rs 50,000 bond to keep peace until one year or the completion of ongoing inquiry.

During a review of ongoing hydropower projects in the state, discussions centered on the availability of land for Compensatory Afforestation necessary for advancing hydropower projects. Simplifying the process for new connections and making electricity bills more consumer-friendly were also emphasized. Discussions also focused on hydropower generation, transmission, and distribution sectors, highlighting clean energy production and addressing transmission sector challenges and operational maintenance.

India plans to invest $1 billion to rapidly develop 12 hydropower stations in Arunachal Pradesh, a move that may escalate tensions with China. The initiative, supported by the federal finance ministry, aims to facilitate state government involvement in regulatory clearances and local rehabilitation and is expected to be officially announced in the 2024/2025 federal budget. The federal finance ministry has greenlit up to 7.5 billion rupees ($89.85 million) in financial aid for each project. The initiative aims to support northeastern states and expedite regulatory approvals and local rehabilitations. This development is part of broader infrastructure enhancements near the contested border with China.

Expressing concern over the region's vulnerability to natural disasters, the Northeast Human Rights (NEHR) pointed to scientific studies indicating the highly susceptible nature of the South Lhonak Lake to GLOFs. The organization stressed that despite consistent warnings from scientific communities, local activists, and indigenous research organizations, the potential risks of mega-dam projects have not been adequately addressed.

“The deputy commissioner of Siang asked us not to oppose the dam,” said Tarok Siram, the headman of Parong village. “I told him to take the opinion of 116 families in my village. I pointed out that the homes of 43 families will be under water if the dam is built here. The remaining families will have to be relocated.”

The mega power project will submerge the ancestral lands of the Adi community, including the district headquarters of Upper Siang district, Yingkiong, say activists.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

4

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 107

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Details of Sources: Bhanu Tatak, Dibang Resistance, Alifa Zibran Names of Accused: Ebo Mili, Mejo Mihu, Nilim Mahanta

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Water bodies, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

126000

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006
Paragraph 7(i)(III) [Public consultation with affected communities is necessary before granting of environmental clearance] Schedule 1, Item 1(c): [Mandatory clearance to be taken for all projects involving river valley projects]
National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2007
Point 3 (b) [Affected families include any family whose primary place of residence has been adversely affected by the acquisition of land for a project] Clause 7.4.2 [In the case of irrigation or hydel projects, affected families to be given preference in allotment of land. If a family refuses to take land which is offered, they may be given monetary compensation to purchase suitable land elsewhere]
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Section 2 [No state government can pass orders de-reserving a reserved forest or allow forestland to be used for non-forest purpose without prior approval of the Union government]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

No

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Arrest/detention/imprisonment

Judicial harassment

Other harassment

Reported Details of the Violation:

In March 2022, police in Arunachal Pradesh detained lawyer Ebo Mili and Assam-based artist Nilim Mahanta for their role in defacing government property. The two had been arrested for painting the words “No more dams” and a protest fist on the boundary wall of the state civil secretariat in the capital, Itanagar. In August 2023, anti-dam activist and advocate Ebo Mili, along with one Mejo Mihu were detained by the capital police for staging a peaceful protest outside the banquet hall in Itanagar. They were interrogated for hours and were reportedly forced by the police to sign a bond and they were later taken to the ICR deputy commissioner’s office. Mili’s colleague reported that they made them stand for hours at the police station and unnecessarily harassed them. On 8 July 2024, activist lawyer Ebo Mili and Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) convener Dunge Apang were detained by the State Govt. They were released after more than 10 hours of detention.

Date of Violation

July 7, 2024

Location of Violation

Itanagar

Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

National Thermal Power Corporation, Ministry of Power, Government of India, Urban Affairs department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd (NEEPCO), Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam (SJVN), National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC), HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH LIMITED, Office of the Chairman cum Managing Director

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Acheso Atih Welfare Society (AAWA), All Adi welfare society (AAWS), Siang Indigenous Farmer's Forum (SIFF)

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

4

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 107

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Siang Storage Project proposal

Image Credit:  

Bhanu Tatak

Anti-dam activists detained by Itanagar Police while Power Minister of India on state visit.

Image Credit:  

Bhanu Tatak

Video

Guardians of Siang

Other Land Conflicts in Arunachal Pradesh

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now
    Conflicts Map
    Conflict Database
    About Us