NGT Issues Final Clearance Based on Strategic Utility On 21 February 2026 the National Green Tribunal’s Kolkata bench ruled that all required environmental safeguards are in place, permitting the ₹80‑90 000 cr Great Nicobar development to proceed and citing the island’s proximity to the Malacca Strait as a national‑security priority[1]. The order emphasizes that mandatory EIA procedures should not override the project’s “strategic utility,” effectively green‑lighting the scheme[2]. The tribunal’s decision also limits public transparency, stating that strategic considerations justify restricted disclosure[2].

Project Envisions Port, Airport, Power Plant, and Township Across 130 sq km The plan, prepared by ANIIDCO, includes an International Container Transshipment Terminal, a 450 MVA gas‑and‑solar power plant, a new international airport, and a large township, together reshaping roughly 18 % of Great Nicobar’s forest cover[1]. Implementation will require diversion of 130.75 sq km of forest, clearing nearly nine lakh trees and affecting leather‑back turtle nesting sites[2]. The infrastructure is projected to boost cargo‑transshipment capacity and reduce maritime costs in the region[1].

Environmental Safeguards Focus on Coral Relocation and Limited Baseline Data Surveys identified 20 668 coral colonies, of which 16 150 are slated for relocation to mitigate port‑construction impacts[1]. The tribunal accepted a single‑season baseline study and the Zoological Survey of India’s assessment that no major reef lies within the designated port zone, despite activist concerns about nesting habitats and seismic vulnerability[1]. Critics note that the reliance on limited data leaves long‑term ecosystem effects uncertain[2].

Tribal Rights Protected on Paper but Disputed on the Ground The Expert Appraisal Committee reported no displacement of Shompen or Nicobarese communities and affirmed that the Forest Rights Act will safeguard tribal habitats[1]. Tribal council leaders, however, allege coercion to sign “surrender certificates” that cede large tracts of their land, a claim echoed in both reports[2]. The tribunal ordered ANIIDCO to fund the Andaman & Nicobar Tribal Welfare Department, yet the effectiveness of these protections remains contested[1].

Historical Precedent Highlights Risks of Large‑Scale Island Development The Hindu’s earlier coverage references early‑20th‑century British phosphate mining on Banaba (Nauru), which rendered the island uninhabitable and forced relocation of its people, underscoring potential long‑term consequences of intensive extraction activities[2]. Independent scientists warn that the Great Nicobar project could cause comparable biodiversity loss and irreversible habitat degradation[2]. The NGT’s ruling, lacking an independent review, leaves the ultimate environmental and social outcomes to future assessment[2].