A 12-hour bandh in Pasighat on October 23, 2026, has brought long-simmering tensions over the Siang Upper Multipurpose Project (SUMP) project to a boiling point. Organized by groups including the Adi Baane Kebang-United, the protest demanded the release of activists previously detained for opposing the project, the withdrawal of security forces, and an immediate halt to pre-feasibility studies and survey activities.
At its core, the demonstration reflected deep-seated indigenous concerns regarding population displacement, environmental degradation, and the ecological future of the Siang River.
While the bandh was intended as a peaceful expression of dissent, the situation escalated rapidly. According to reports, police use of tear gas and stun grenades sparked panic, followed by incidents of stone-pelting and arson. Targets included the offices of the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC), police vehicles, a local police station, and the residences of Members of the Legislative Assembly. In the aftermath, authorities arrested human rights lawyer and activist Ebo Mili, youth leaders Otul Jerang and Tajong Talom, and approximately 26 others, including minors. Several key activists have since surrendered to the authorities, publicly stating that they were not involved in the violence or destruction of property. There are also reports, yet to be independently verified, that some detainees have begun a hunger strike in custody.
Escalation And The Question Of Dissent
Any acts of violence, damage to public property, or attacks on individuals must be investigated, and those responsible held accountable through due process of law. Yet the events of October 23 cannot be understood in isolation. Local indigenous communities have long raised concerns about displacement, environmental impact, the loss of ancestral lands, and the future of the Siang River through peaceful, democratic means. Treating that sustained dissent as a security problem risks turning a dispute over development policy into a crisis of rights.
Under the Constitution of India, the rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of expression, and democratic dissent are fundamental. Where arrests are made en masse and charges framed broadly, there is a tangible risk of criminalizing legitimate opposition. Invoking stringent legal provisions without evidence linking particular individuals to violent acts further weakens public trust and deepens resentment.
The Way Forward
De-escalation begins with a review of the arrests and the charges. Ebo Mili, Otul Jerang, Tajong Talom, and others detained solely for peaceful participation in the movement should be released, particularly minors and those against whom no credible evidence of involvement in violence exists. Cases carrying overly broad charges warrant review and, where necessary, withdrawal, and harsh laws should not be invoked in the absence of evidence of an intent to commit violence.
The welfare of those in custody must also be assured. Detainees, especially minors and those on hunger strike, require adequate medical care, close monitoring, and unhindered access to legal counsel, in accordance with Indian law and juvenile justice safeguards. Alongside this, an impartial and independent investigation into the events at Pasighat is essential, examining both the proportionality of force used by security personnel and the circumstances in which the clashes erupted.
Equally important is a shift in approach: meaningful, transparent dialogue with affected communities and protest groups, rather than a reliance on security deployments and arrests. The release of those detained would help lower tensions, restore confidence in democratic processes, and open space for substantive discussion of the SUMP project. Development initiatives of this scale must rest on the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous communities, not be imposed by suppressing peaceful opposition. The future of the Siang Valley will be determined less by the pace of surveys than by whether the people who live there are treated as participants rather than obstacles.
---
*Member, SUMP Affected Area Youth Association
Comments