Tribal Council Resists Land Surrender in Great Nicobar Project

Tribal Council Resists Land Surrender in Great Nicobar Project

Why in News? 

Recently, the Tribal Council of Little and Great Nicobar alleged pressure from the district administration to sign “surrender certificates” for ancestral lands to make way for the massive Great Nicobar Island Project, which they fear will permanently strip their communities of heritage, livelihood and future security.

What Is the Great Nicobar Island Project?

• About: The Great Nicobar Island Project is a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure and strategic initiative approved by the Union Cabinet in 2021. It seeks to transform this remote Indian Ocean territory into a major maritime, economic and urban hub over the next three decades. 

• Nodal Agency: The project is being spearheaded by the Government of India’s development think-tank, NITI Aayog, which prepared the initial pre-feasibility and master plans. Implementation has been entrusted to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation Limited (ANIIDCO), a government-owned agency responsible for infrastructure, tourism and trade development in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

• Aims: The Great Nicobar Project aims to establish a deep-sea international container transshipment terminal and spur economic growth, tourism, trade connectivity and regional development.

• Land Area: The project spans an area of about 166 sq km, approximately 10 percent of Great Nicobar Island’s total landmass. The project involves lands of Galathea Bay, Pemmaya Bay, and Nanjappa Bay. 

• Cost: The total estimated cost of the project is approximately ₹92,000 crore. This includes expenditure for all major components over a planned 30-year implementation period. 

• • Components: The project is composed of multiple flagship elements:
    • International Container Transshipment Terminal (ICTT) at Galathea Bay: A deep-water port with a planned handling capacity of up to 16 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units), intended to position India as a rival to Singapore and Colombo in regional transshipment.
    • Greenfield International Airport: An international airport with a runway capable of accommodating wide-body aircraft and peak hourly passenger traffic of about 4,000. It is planned as a dual-use facility (civilian and military), enhancing connectivity and defence readiness.
    • Power Generation Complex: A 450 MVA energy hub combining gas-based and solar power plants to ensure a reliable energy supply for the port, township and ancillary infrastructure.
    • Integrated Township: A planned 16,569-hectare township to accommodate residents, workers, and service providers, supporting a projected population of up to around 65,000 in early phases (potentially rising further over decades).

• Significance: 

• • • Strategic Importance: The island’s proximity to the Strait of Malacca allows India to enhance maritime security, monitor naval movements and support defence logistics across the Bay of Bengal and Indo-Pacific region.
    • Economic Impact: The project is projected to boost trade volumes, employment opportunities, tourism and integrate India more deeply into global supply chains, especially in maritime logistics.
    • Geopolitical Role: Positioned as part of India’s Act East Policy, the development could strengthen ties with ASEAN nations and assert India’s influence in the fast-growing Indo-Pacific economic corridor.

• Long-Term Vision: It also aligns with national programs like the Sagarmala initiative and Amrit Kaal Vision 2047, aimed at enhancing infrastructure and global competitiveness. 

Concerns of Tribal Council of Little and Great Nicobar

The Tribal Council of Little and Great Nicobar, representing Nicobarese and Shompen communities, has raised deep and sustained objections to the Great Nicobar Island Mega-Infrastructure Project. Their concerns centre on multiple interconnected aspects of the project and its implementation:

• Pressure to Surrender Ancestral Tribal Lands: Council representatives allege that in a January 7 2026 meeting with district administration officials, they were asked to sign “surrender certificates” relinquishing claims to ancestral villages and tribal lands as part of the project’s space requirements. They have refused to sign without thorough internal deliberation, asserting that surrendering these lands jeopardises heritage, livelihood and cultural rights. 
• Denotification and Loss of Tribal Reserve: A significant portion of the island’s tribal reserve — statutorily protected land — is proposed to be denotified and diverted for infrastructure components like the port, airport, power plant, and township. Roughly 84.10 sq km of land earmarked for project infrastructure overlaps with traditional tribal settlements. The Council emphasises that this denotification threatens historic settlements and customary use areas.
• Lack of Forest Rights Act (FRA) Implementation and Consent: The Council highlights that forest rights under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA) have not been formally identified, settled, or consented to by tribal communities before forest land diversion — a statutory prerequisite. Despite administrative claims of settled rights certificates (2022), tribal representatives say they were not consulted or properly informed, evidence that genuine consent under FRA processes has not been obtained.
• Displacement from Pre-2004 Tsunami Villages and Resettlement Concerns: Many Nicobarese were relocated after the 2004 tsunami from villages now part of the development plan. These communities had been promised temporary settlement with eventual return rights to original village lands. The Council stresses that no adequate or responsive policy has been enacted to enable return, leaving survivors unsettled in limited Campbell Bay sites.
• Legal and Constitutional Compliance Issues: The Council’s grievances are grounded in perceived violations of constitutional safeguards for Scheduled Tribes and Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) such as the Shompen, alongside statutory instruments like the FRA and the Andaman & Nicobar Islands Protection of Aboriginal Tribes Regulation (1956). They warn that unilateral administrative actions undermine these protections and may invite legal scrutiny if unresolved.
• Advocacy for Ecological and Cultural Preservation: Beyond land rights, the Council underscores that forced land surrender and relocation could fracture traditional socio-cultural structures, erode customary ecological stewardship, and sever deep ties between tribes and their ancestral lands — factors integral to tribal identity, social governance, and sustainable livelihoods. Coastal development destroys vital natural defenses like Galathea’s mangroves, which protect against tsunamis and storms, leaving communities vulnerable to disaster. 

Current Status  

• The Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has stated that several conditions for Stage-I forest clearance remain outstanding under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) that are still pending before final project approval can be granted.
• Environmental clearances are currently being challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), while the Calcutta High Court has scheduled a final hearing regarding forest clearances for the week of March 30, 2026. 
• Upcoming meetings with Tribal Councils and district officials seek to resolve land claims and finalize village relocation strategies, ensuring community-led solutions.