In the cold, high-altitude deserts of Ladakh, Sonam Wangchuk has become more than an engineer and educator — he’s a symbol.
Since Ladakh’s reorganisation in 2019, all that were promised: decentralisation of a greater order, safeguarding of Ladakhi identity, constitutional protection. But many feel those assurances have been broken. Employment is scarce as ever, ownership of land uncertain, and governance far away. The Sixth Schedule — a Constitutional provision intended to protect tribal societies by providing self-rules to such societies on matters of land, forest and riches — is yet to be transformed from a demand into a right.
Wangchuk staged a 35-day fast in 2025 in an effort to swell these demands. Meanwhile, administrative pressure escalated: his institute’s lease of its lands was cancelled, investigations were sought to be initiated, and peaceful protests were accused of inciting violence. Four people lost their lives, scores were injured. Wangchuk was arrested, his NGO’s license to receive foreign funding suspended. He claims to have been made a scapegoat; others attribute it to having stirred up the protests.
All he is seeking is basic but deep: Statehood to Ladakh (not mere Union Territory status), coverage under the Sixth Schedule, constitutional safeguards, jobs on a real scale, real role in government. These are no extortionist demands — they are cries of fairness, of dignity, of survival.
The Demands
- Statehood for Ladakh — not just Union Territory status.
- Inclusion under the Sixth Schedule for constitutional safeguards.
- Job and land rights for locals.
- Decentralized governance with more representation for Ladakhis.
Why It Matters
- For Ladakh, it is about survival — preserving its ecology, economy, and identity.
- For India, it is about listening to marginal voices and honoring constitutional promises.
- For activism, it is a reminder of the risks reformers face when peaceful demands clash with political power.
As the dust settles, two questions:
Will the government really listen to these demands, or will harsh statements and arrest be a replacement for answers?
And will peace, built so carefully through non-violence and education, survive the frustration and anger of young people who feel they have already waited too long?