Bengaluru: On May 29, Union environment minister Bhupender Yadav spoke at the conclave of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), at a programme that was themed on “Building Trust – India First” and how climate, the environment and sustainability play a crucial role in this, with regard to industry.

Yadav called India a “land of development-oriented nature worshippers”, and said that India’s is a “story” of “democracy walking alongside development”, in the context of India’s economy rising ‘ahead’ of Japan, the United Kingdom and France. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has made environmental protection a “participative process”, he remarked, referring to Mission LIFE, a programme implemented by the current NDA government. India’s climate action and policy are built on building trust, and ensuring that India comes first, he said.

While Yadav dropped all the ‘right’ words and phrases in his speech – climate resilience, commitment to sustainability, and India being a voice of the Global South – there’s mounting evidence to show that India does not walk the talk when it comes to some of these aspects. This is especially true in matters pertaining to the environment, and the ministry that Yadav heads, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Here are five instances where democracy and democratic dissent do not seem to apply to the environment in today’s India, especially with regard to developmental projects.

1. Ignoring dissent about the Nicobar projects and democratic safeguards falling through

A “disaster”, “death knell”, “catastrophic”: these are some of the adjectives that critics have used to define the slew of projects proposed by the Union government on Great Nicobar Island in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The projects, costing more than Rs 72,000 crore, involve constructing an international transshipment terminal, a greenfield airport, a township and a power plant in the 970 sq km-small Great Nicobar Island that is surrounded by vibrant coral reefs and is the southernmost in the Nicobar group of islands in the Bay of Bengal.

The National Green Tribunal, India’s apex green court, has already ruled in favour of the projects despite the grave ecological concerns that social and science researchers have warned will affect both the indigenous communities living on the island (the Shompen and the Nicobarese, who are listed as Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups) and its endemic and unique biodiversity. The Union government has also already denotified a part of the tribal reserve which had been set aside for the indigenous communities; in 2021, the Union environment ministry under Yadav denotified the Galathea Bay Wildlife Sanctuary for the projects too.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration, in a recent tender notification, has also claimed that gram sabha consent – which the Forest Conservation Act (1980) had mandated as necessary for such projects – will not be applicable to the villages in the area, or the indigenous communities living here, thanks to the recent amendments to the Act that exempts projects for “national security” among others, from gram sabha consents. Conservationists and expert groups were quick to point out this loophole when the amendments reached Parliament for discussion in 2023. However, the government did not follow due course on these, and the committee appointed to look into the amendments bulldozed through the recommendations and cautions that these groups highlighted, passing the new Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam in 2023.

Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change Bhupender Yadav speaks during the 24th edition of the World Sustainable Development Summit (WSDS 2025), in New Delhi, Wednesday, March 5, 2025. Photo: PTI

2. Anger brews in........

© The Wire