Wayanad Landslide 2024: A Human Rights Perspective on Environmental Disaster and Socioeconomic Fallout

Jun 01, 2025

By Maju Varghese, Sarath Cheloor

Introduction

On July 30, 2024, the beautiful landscapes of Wayanad district in Kerala were devastated by one of the most devastating landslides in India’s recent history. Triggered by incessant rainfall exceeding 570 millimetres over 48 hours, the landslide in Meppadi Panchayat led to the loss of over 400 lives, with 32 individuals still missing and presumed dead as per the government’s February 2025 notification. This calamity not only underscores the environmental vulnerabilities of the region but also brings to light significant human rights concerns, particularly regarding the rights and welfare of the affected communities.

Environmental and Climatic Factors

Wayanad’s topography, characterised by steep slopes and elevations ranging from 700 to 2100 meters, inherently predisposes it to landslides. The Geological Survey of India has long identified the Wayanad-Kozhikode border as highly susceptible to such disasters. However, the severity of the 2024 landslide was intensified by anthropogenic factors. Unregulated deforestation, expansion of plantations, and unscientific land use have significantly destabilised the region’s ecological balance.

Climate change further compounds these risks. Studies from the Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT) indicate that the warming of the Arabian Sea contributes to the formation of deep cloud systems, leading to unpredictable and intense rainfall events. Moreover, recent assessments reveal a staggering 62% decline in Wayanad’s forest cover, diminishing the land’s natural resilience against such disasters.

The Catastrophe Unfolds: Facts and Figures

The landslide’s impact was catastrophic. Satellite imagery from the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) on July 31, 2024, revealed that approximately 86,000 square meters of land had been displaced, with debris traveling up to 8 kilometers from the origin point. This massive earth movement engulfed forests, farmlands, and settlements, altering the course of the Iruvaniphuza River and breaching its banks.

Infrastructure suffered immensely:

• Approximately 2,007 houses and 111 cattle sheds were destroyed.
• Three estates were ravaged, affecting the livelihoods of 409 workers.
• Agricultural damage spanned 626 hectares, with 359 hectares belonging to small and marginal farmers.

Beyond the immediate physical destruction, the disaster disrupted the socioeconomic fabric of the region, affecting industries, tourism, and forest productivity.

 

The destruction of homes and means of livelihood has left many in precarious conditions. While property owners have avenues for compensation, those without formal ownership—such as tenants, informal workers, and migrant laborers—often find themselves excluded from relief measures. In many disasters, those who are indirectly affected and do not fall within the officially designated impact zone are often excluded from relief measures.

Humanitarian Response and Rehabilitation Efforts

In the immediate aftermath, the Kerala government established 45 relief camps, providing shelter to over 4,000 individuals. The state health department set up control rooms to coordinate emergency assistance, deploying at least 1,500 rescue personnel, including forensic surgeons.

The government of Kerala, recognising the need for long-term solutions, approved a comprehensive rehabilitation project. This includes planning an establishment of two townships equipped with essential amenities, aiming to provide a safe and sustainable living environment for those affected. Additionally, a rental policy was formulated to assist survivors during the transition period. Affected families are provided with a monthly allowance of ₹6,000 to facilitate their stay in rented accommodations or with relatives until permanent housing is arranged.

Financial Accountability and the Loan Waiver Debate

A significant point of contention has been the financial liabilities of the disaster victims.  With thousands of homes and agricultural lands damaged, people were in a precarious situation when loan agents approached those living in relief camps to recover EMIs for loans they had taken. The fact that the assets created through these loans—including houses and farmland—had been destroyed did not deter the agents from demanding monthly installments.

Residents of the affected areas demanded that their loans be waived and that they be granted relief to rebuild their lives. The total outstanding loans in the affected region amount to approximately ₹35.30 crore, including ₹11 crore in agricultural loans, with the remainder comprising home loans, personal loans, SHG linkage loans, vehicle loans, and others.

In response to the situation, the Chief Minister and the agriculture minister demanded a complete loan waiver. The Chief Minister convened a meeting of the State Level Bankers Committee and formally placed the demand before all banks, while also announcing a loan waiver from the state-controlled Kerala Bank. The write off was a model for other banks as loans was waived for the following categories or people.  It included, waive off to those who lost their lives, those who lost houses, property, establishments, livelihoods, those who lost family members, those who got isolated because of destruction of roads etc. those who lost farm lands and crops and miscellaneous category.  These categories show the care and perspective which needs to be employed by the banks.

Public sector banks, despite mobilising funds from the state and generating substantial profits, have remained largely insensitive to the needs of the common people. It is important to note that in 2024 alone, these banks wrote off loans worth over ₹1.70 lakh crore, while earning profits exceeding ₹1.4 lakh crore. This exposes a troubling double standard: generous write-offs for corporations, and a stony silence when it comes to addressing the concerns of ordinary citizens. While these banks are quick to collect deposits from the public, they reserve loan write-offs primarily for corporate borrowers and often shirk their responsibilities to support communities in distress—even in the face of natural disasters.

The High Court of Kerala, which had taken suo motu cognizance of the need to prevent and manage natural disasters, also took note of the public demand for loan waivers. During the hearing, the court directed the central government to file an affidavit on the matter and expressed support for a loan waiver, invoking provisions under the Disaster Management Act.

However, in its affidavit, the central government informed the court that loans of those affected by the landslides in Wayanad would not be waived but only rescheduled or restructured. Subsequently, section 13 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005—which could have supported such a waiver—was removed through an amendment to the law passed by the government.

Lessons and the Path Forward

The Wayanad tragedy serves as a stark reminder of the intricate linkages between environmental protection and human rights. To prevent future disasters and uphold the rights of vulnerable populations, several measures are needed:

• Environmental Conservation: Implementing sustainable land-use practices, reforestation, and strict regulation of construction in ecologically sensitive zones.
• Inclusive Rehabilitation Policies: Ensuring that relief and rehabilitation efforts encompass all affected individuals, regardless of property ownership or socioeconomic status.
• Financial Relief Mechanisms: Establishing clear guidelines for loan waivers in the wake of natural disasters to alleviate the financial burden on victims.
• Community Engagement: Facilitating the active participation of local communities in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery planning.

Conclusion

The 2024 Wayanad landslide is not merely an environmental disaster but a human rights crisis that exposes the vulnerabilities of marginalised communities in the face of climate-induced calamities. Addressing the multifaceted challenges arising from such events requires a holistic approach that integrates environmental sustainability, socioeconomic equity, and human rights considerations. As we reflect on this tragedy, it is imperative to transform lessons learned into actionable policies that safeguard both people and the planet.

 

Maju Varghese works as a Coordinator with Partners in Justice Concerns India. He also serves as the Asia-Pacific focal point for the Internationalist Solidarity Systems of Friends of the Earth.

Sarath Cheloor is a social activist who has been actively working with social movements and organisations for last 20 years and assists marginalized communities in their struggle for justice.