In a now widely reported development, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) recently granted its approval to the ₹90,000-plus crore mega-infrastructure project in Great Nicobar Island. Pivoted by the Niti Aayog and implemented by the Port-Blair-based Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation (ANIIDCO), the project includes a transshipment terminal at Galathea Bay in the south of the island, a dual-purpose airport adjoining the port, a power plant, and a massive township and tourism project spread over 130 sq km of pristine tropical forests.
The six-member NGT bench said in its February 16 order that it found no reason to interfere with the environmental clearance (EC) granted to the project in November 2022, which was subsequently challenged in the NGT on a range of procedural and scientific grounds. The bench noted that adequate safeguards were provided in the EC conditions, and that it had, therefore, refused to stay the clearance in the first round of litigation.
It observed that the remaining issues (a total of three) highlighted in the first round had been dealt with by the High-Powered Committee (HPC) set up by the Tribunal in April 2023. These were related to the adequacy of one-season data relied upon for the clearance, the presence of coral colonies in Galathea Bay, and the fact that the port site was designated CRZ-1A, where port construction is not allowed. CRZ-1A is a coastal area with maximum protection on account of its ecological importance — the presence of marine turtle nesting beaches, ground nesting birds, mangroves and coral reefs, among others.
The case of Galathea Bay, the site of the port, is instructive. It is listed, for instance, in the Union ministry of environment, forests and climate change (MoEFCC)’s 2021 Marine Turtle Action Plan as one of the most significant turtle nesting sites in India (four sea-turtle species nest here) and is also recognised as the most important nesting site of the Giant Leatherback Turtle in the northern Indian Ocean. The forests beyond the coast are a prominent nesting site of the Nicobar Megapode, the endemic ground-dwelling bird that is unique to the Nicobar islands. There are luxurious stands of mangroves here, and as per the records of the Zoological Survey of India, the bay houses more than 20,000 coral colonies.
All available records and evidence suggest it should have CRZ-1A status and maximum legal protection. Yet, the MoEFCC went ahead and granted EC to the project (and the port in Galathea Bay) in November 2022. It is this clearance that was challenged in the NGT in the hope that it would be examined on its merits and facts on record. A perusal of the case and its final order dismissing the challenge suggests, however, that the NGT adopted a hyper-technical approach that was also underpinned by serious procedural impropriety and ignorance of scientific evidence.
A prime example is the HPC that the NGT constituted in April 2023 and whose recommendations were the basis for the tribunal’s final order. The committee was made up entirely of representatives either of those invested in the project or those who had granted the clearance under question. These included, among others, the Niti Aayog (the key promoter of the project), the secretary of A&N administration, who is also chair, ANIIDCO, the project proponent, and the MoEFCC that granted the environmental clearance.
There is an obvious conflict of interest in authorising entities to adjudicate a matter where their own decisions are being challenged. This completely vitiates the entire process and the final order, and it is rather unfathomable why the NGT should have done this.
At the heart of the NGT order is the conclusion of this HPC, which says no part of the project area, including Galathea Bay, “is in CRZ-IA area”. This contention flies in the face of all available scientific evidence and facts from the ground. Just two instances make this clear. The port site has more than 20,000 coral colonies, a reality accepted by the project proponent, the MoEFCC and indeed the NGT itself. One of the EC conditions, in fact, is that 16,000 of these colonies need to be translocated, confirming that the site has corals and, by extension, this is CRZ-1A.
The other is turtle nesting. Records obtained from the Andaman and Nicobar forest department show more than 500 leatherback nestings here annually for three consecutive nesting seasons starting 2022. The number of 649 for 2022 is in fact the highest recorded since turtle monitoring began here. Galathea Bay is a turtle nesting site of great global importance and by default CRZ-1A. The construction of the port and its breakwaters entail the closing of the mouth of Galathea Bay by 90%. Turtles that enter the bay today via a mouth that is three kilometres wide will eventually be left with an opening of only 300 metres. The ecology of the bay will be drastically altered, the turtles will surely stop coming then and we would have wilfully destroyed a priceless natural asset. The Galathea Bay of the future may not be a CRZ-1A site, but that is for the future. Its status, importance and value today is undeniable.
If this is the ground reality, what explains the huge effort to change the category on paper and in maps? The answer is evident in ANIIDCO’s 2024 affidavit in the NGT, where it noted: “The HPC came to the conclusion that in the Report submitted [to it] by the NCSCM [National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management], it has been determined that construction of the port is permissible in CRZ-IB area but not permissible in CRZ-IA. The NCSCM, hence, concluded that no part of the project area is falling under CRZ-1A.”
The inference is as simple as it is outrageous: Category change was mandated not by changed ecological realities but the compulsions of allowing the port to be constructed at Galathea Bay.
What the NGT order has done is condone the violations. It has a lot to answer for.
Pankaj Sekhsaria is the editor of Island on Edge: The Great Nicobar Crisis. The views expressed are personal
