PUCL condemns the throttling of the right to speech, association and assembly in Ladakh

Sep 30, 2025

Release Sonam Wangchuk and the other detainees and withdraw all charges foisted against them unconditionally.
Resume a meaningful dialogue with the people of Ladakh on all their legitimate and democratic demands, including the immediate grant of sixth schedule status under the Constitution and statehood.

The police arbitrarily and unconstitutionally detained climate activist Sonam Wangchuk on 26^th September, 2025 under the draconian National Security Act (NSA). No grounds of detention have been made available to the family. Media reports indicate that the arrest of Wangchuk is under the NSA and that Wangchuk is currently being detained in Jodhpur prison, Rajasthan. Sixty others have been sent into judicial custody under sec 109 of the BNS (attempt to murder amongst other charges).

Leh has been clamped down with section 163 BNSS, (equivalent to sec 144 of the old CrPC) with all schools, markets, institutions, offices and the courts closed with the streets being barricaded preventing people from accessing their constitutional right to the freedom of movement. Apart from the above curtailment of fundamental rights, there is total Internet shutdown, despite the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin v Union of India, stating that “Freedom of speech and expression through the medium of the internet is an integral part of Article 19(1)(a), and restrictions on such a fundamental right must be constitutionally justified.”

Sonam Wangchuk and the case of NSA

The NSA is a draconian legislation which permits preventive detention without trial for a period up to two years. As of the time of this statement, Wangchuk has not been served a copy of the detention order. This is a violation of his statutory and constitutionals rights as unless an accused is expeditiously served a copy of the detention order, he or she cannot challenge the detention. The fact that Wangchuk is detained outside Ladakh is troubling as it indicates the desire of the Government to unfairly and vindictively isolate Wangchuk from his family and supporters in Ladakh.

The Union Government seems to have arrested him as he is seen to be responsible for the protests which culminated in violence in Leh on 24^th September, 2025 with four people being killed in police firing with 86 being injured with 15 of those injured being critical. At the outset, PUCL condoles the needless deaths of young people and is deeply saddened at the injuries suffered by the young protestors.

The protest leading to the violence

The protests in Ladakh had around 5,000–6,000 participants who poured into the streets of Leh demanding statehood for Ladakh, the inclusion of Ladakh under the sixth schedule of the Constitution, establishment of a public service commission to address joblessness, and two parliamentary seats for more representation. The call for dharna was a joint call by the Leh Apex body and Kargil Democratic Alliance. Sonam Wangchuk had only recently become a member of the Leh Apex Body. He too was a part of the protest and he and several others sat on a fast unto death.

The protestors were frustrated with the fact that the government had not responded in any manner to the ongoing fast for these demands. The frustration was compounded by the fact that the date announced as 6th October for talks by the Union Government was perceived as too late especially when people on hunger strike had fainted and had to be hospitalised ! The frustration was also with the unempathetic attitude of the BJP which had just recently won the Local bodies election with the promise of recognising statehood for Ladakh as well as including Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule and had not taken any action on the same. This frustration of the protestors transmuted into violence which resulted in Government buildings being attacked and the BJP headquarters being vandalised. There were also injuries to police personnel.

However the response of the police to these acts of vandalism was grossly disproportionate. Live ammunition was fired into an unarmed crowd, causing an irreplaceable loss of life of four of the young protestors including a Kargil war hero from Ladakh as well as critically injuring 15 others and 86 others with minor injuries. Bystanders and those passing by were also hit with bullets.

The law prescribes that only an executive magistrate or an officer- in charge of a police station can order the use of force. Even then, every officer must use as little force, and do as little injury to person and property. The death of four persons and critical injuries to 15 others indicates that the police did not exercises their power within the limits of law as a measure of the last resort and with a view to causing least amount of injury.

PUCL strongly condemns the disproportionate and indiscriminate firing by the paramilitary forces.

Delegitimising the Protest, making Sonam Wangchuk a Scapegoat: The Union Government’s toolkit for addressing its own failures.

It is clear that the Union Government’s toolkit is to paint genuine grievances as an outside plot, find scapegoats for its failure to address the democratic deficit and seek in every manner possible to delegitimize the democratic demands of the Ladakhi people. It is with this lens that the Union Government has sought to besmirch Sonan Wangchuk as an anti-national king pin behind the protests using all the tools in this time tested toolkit used to delegitimize peoples movements. It is unfortunate that the Union Government has sought to pin the blame on Sonam Wangchuk for the protests instead of taking responsibility itself for failing to institutionalise democratic institutions and redress the peoples grievances in Ladakh.

The Home Ministry blamed Wangchuk for making “provocative statements” that led to Wednesday’s violencee. Wangchuk is alleged to have referred positively to the recent “Gen Z” protests in Nepal and Bangladesh. However this interpretation is denied by Wangchuk’s wife who contends that the statements are taken out of context and notes that what Wangchuk said was that ‘when governments are not responsive, it leads to a revolution’.

The fact that Wangchuk attended a climate conference in Pakistan under the UN auspices is portrayed a Pakistan ‘link’ and a threat to national security. As his wife Gitanjali Angomo noted the visit was ‘purely professional and climate-focused’.

From personal attacks to attack on the institutions run by Sonam Wangchuk

Wanchuk’s NGO, the Students Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL) has had its FCRA licence cancelled on grounds of grounds of five alleged violations of the FCRA. One such violation is that SECMOL received ₹4,93,205 from a foreign donor. The purpose for which the donation was received was an educational and the specific activity was – “awareness on youth migration, food security and sovereignty”. This according to the Home Ministry is a violation because foreign contributions cannot be accepted for study on “sovereignty of the nation”. The word ‘sovereignty’ in relation to food is not about nation state sovereignty but a term of art in the social activist sector which references ‘the right of peoples to define their own food and agriculture systems, emphasizing control over food production, distribution, and consumption for local communities.’ Its hard not to come to the conclusion that the FCRA is being instrumentalised to target the right to association itself.

What is clear from the multiple efforts to besmirch the reputation of Sonam Wangchuk who is a well-known innovator, Magsaysay award winner and climate and democracy activist as ‘ant-national’ is that the authorities have come to the conclusion that the freedom of speech, association and assembly, even when used to highlight the genuine grievances of the people of Ladakh will not be tolerated.

Violation of the Right to Free Speech in the name of Provocative Statements

With respect to speech, the Government in its rather loose and wide interpretation of so called ‘provocative statements’ by Wangchuk, has given the go by to the constitutional protection guaranteed to all citizens of the freedom of speech and expression. The Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v Union of India, distinguished between ‘discussion, ‘advocacy’, and ‘incitement’. The Court held that, ‘Mere discussion or even advocacy of a particular cause howsoever unpopular is at the heart of Article 19(1)(a). It is only when such discussion or advocacy reaches the level of incitement that Article 19(2) kicks in. It is at this stage that a law may be made curtailing the speech or expression that leads inexorably to or tends to cause public disorder or tends to cause or tends to affect the sovereignty & integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, etc’. The accusations against Sonam Wangchuk do not, prima facie meet this high threshold of ‘incitement’ to violence.

Violation of the Right to Association through the cancellation of the FCRA of one of the Institutions founded by Wangchuk

With respect to the right to association, the cancellation of the FCRA license of SECMOL on technical violations of the Act again casts a light on how the FCRA regulations are used to target the right to association itself. This is in violation of Article 13 of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, which makes clear that ‘Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to solicit, receive and utilize resources for the express purpose of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms.’ If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, makes the promotion of human rights an imperative, it is vital that the right to receive resources for the purpose of promoting human rights be protected. It is clear that the educational and environmental work of SECMOL was aligned to the values of the UDHR and of the Indian Constitution and the targeting of SECMOL is meant to send out a message that the grievances of the people of Ladakh ought not to be expressed.

Violation of the Right to Peaceful Assembly

The right to protest is a fundamental right under Article 19(1) (b )the Indian Constitution. The vital significance of this right is elaborated under General Comment No. 37 on Article 21 of the ICCPR which notes that ‘the fundamental human right of peaceful assembly enables individuals to express themselves collectively and to participate in shaping their societies.’ The vital importance of this right is illustrated in the General Comment No.37:

The right of peaceful assembly is, moreover, a valuable tool that can and has been used to recognize and realize a wide range of other rights, including economic, social and cultural rights. It is of particular importance to marginalized individuals and groups. Failure to respect and ensure the right of peaceful assembly is typically a marker of repression.

The true significance of the right to peaceful assembly in Ladakh has to be seen against the background of the democratic deficit that Ladakh suffers from ever since it was converted into a Union territory. Ladakh lost its representatives in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, with the assembly being replaced by the rule of the bureaucracy. In Ladakh today there are no representative institutions in Ladakh at the level of the state. The sole representative of the Ladakhi people is the member of parliament. The people of Ladakh have to represent any concerns they have directly with the Home Ministry which is remote and difficult to access.

So Called ‘development’ of Ladakh, Against the will of the People : Who is hearing the Ladakhis ?

Against this backdrop of a serious democratic deficit, there are wide ranging changes which are underway ever since Ladakh became a union territory. Since Ladakh lost its special status, the protections for land rights has been adversely affected. Huge parcels of land have been promised to the corporate sector and have been taken over by the Indian Government generating unease among the Ladakhi people. In particular, the perception is that the fragile ecosystem of the Himalayas will come under enormous pressure with the proposed industrialization of Ladakh. The democratic avenues for expressing these concerns are very few, allowing for pressure to build up on the system.

The right to public protest in Ladakh thus has an even greater significance due to the absence of democratic institutions. PUCL condemns the firing on an unarmed assembly as nothing other than an attempt to throttle the last institution of democracy in Ladakh, namely the public assembly.

The PUCL demands that the Union Government:

Institute an independent judicial enquiry into the incident of violence and firing upon Ladakhi civilians, leading to tragic death of four persons and injuries of many others.
Release all the arrested and detained protestors /youth immediately, in order to facilitate a democratic dialogue on the core demands of the people of Ladakh
Ensure full medical support and compensation to all the injured persons as well as compensation to the family members of the deceased, along with a permanent government job to one person from the families of the deceased.
Release Sonam Wangchuk, withdraw charges foisted against him under the draconian National Security Act (NSA) and ensure his safe return from Jodhpur to Leh.
Withdraw the order under sec 163 BNSS, (144 CrPC) in Leh which prohibits the assembly of more than four persons, restore normalcy and allowing the opening of courts, schools and shops and other establishments.
Recognise the right of people to more freely throughout Leh by removing all barricades on roads.
Resume internet services in line with its vital significance as a constitutional right under Article 19(1)(a)
Resume a meaningful dialogue with the people of Ladakh, including the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), on all their legitimate and democratic demands, in particular immediate grant of sixth schedule status under the Constitution, and statehood.
Declare a full moratorium on all mega projects and land transfers, including the proposed solar and wind park over 48,000 acres of land in Changthang, until formal grant of sixth schedule status and statehood to Ladakh.
End all repressive measures on the people’s movement of Ladakh, including the unfair targeting of institutions associated with Sonam Wangchuk.
Repeal the National Security Act as it violates the constitutional protection of the freedom of speech, expression, assembly and
Repeal the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act as it violates the constitutional protection of the right to association and is also violative of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.

Kavita Srivastava
President

Suresh V
General Secretary