Great Nicobar Island (GNI) is not an abstraction on a map. It is a living island – dense rainforests, mangroves, and the long sweep of ancient Galathea Bay, first surveyed in 1845-47. Its ecological wealth is foundational, reflected in its notified biosphere reserve and two national parks. That inheritance is precisely why decisions about its future demand the highest institutional vigilance and public scrutiny.
National Green Tribunal (NGT) was created to provide that vigilance. But in upholding clearance for the Great Nicobar project earlier this month, it has fallen short. It relied on studies by Zoological Survey of India (ZSI) and National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM) – both under environment ministry that granted the clearance. It accepted conditions such as staggered tree-felling or protecting nesting trees ‘as far as possible’ – phrases elastic enough to mean everything and nothing.
NGT also okayed NCSCM’s finding that no part of the project lies within Coastal Regulation Zone Category IA – the most stringently protected coastal classification – despite the site including Galathea Bay, a critical habitat for leatherback turtles, corals, mangroves and Nicobar megapodes. It further declined to place in the public domain the findings of High-Powered Committee constituted in 2023, whose report was submitted in 2025, instead accepting a plea of strategic confidentiality without fuller explanation.
Strategic development cannot be ignored, but urgency does not override environmental law. Institutions matter most when the stakes are highest. If morning shows the day, the safeguards NGT has sought may well be diluted at the first opportunity, as seen repeatedly across India. What truly matters is enforcement, not mere endorsement.
