Arunachal Pradesh
Upper Siang, Dibang, Siang, Subansiri, Lohit river basins
,
Geku
,
Siang, East Siang, Upper Siang, Dibang valley and West Siang
Published :
Dec 2023
|
Updated :
August 18, 2025
Local resistance and environmental concerns over 12 hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
150000
People affected
1972
Year started
ha.
Land area affected
Households affected
150000
People Affected
1972
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Hydroelectric Project
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Hydroelectric Project
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In Arunachal Pradesh, a substantial conflict has emerged over the proposed development of 12 hydropower projects with a cumulative capacity of 11,523 MW, allocated to PSUs such as North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd (NEEPCO) (2,620 MW), Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd (SJVN) (5,097 MW), and National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC) (3,800 MW). Indigenous communities, particularly the Adi tribe from the Siang, Upper Siang, East Siang, West Siang, and Dibang Valley districts, have opposed these projects due to concerns about land submersion, environmental degradation, and cultural loss.

While the Tato-II HEP (700 MW), the Tato-I HEP (186 MW), the Heo HEP (240 MW), the Naying HEP (1,000 MW) and the Hirong HEP (500 MW) have been allotted to the NEEPCO, the Etalin HEP (3,097 MW), the Attunli HEP (680 MW), the Emini HEP (500 MW), the Amulin HEP (420 MW) and the Mihumdon HEP (400 MW) have been given to the SJVN. The Subansiri Upper HEP (2,000 MW) and the Subansiri Middle (Kamala) HEP (1,800 MW) have been allotted to the NHPC.

These projects were earlier entrusted upon private sector developers about 15 years ago, but they remained non-starters due to myriad of reasons. The state government, therefore, decided to rope in central hydro PSUs to give a push to the languishing projects.

On 12 August 2023, Arunachal Pradesh’s Power Commissioner, Ankur Garg, signed the agreements with the heads of the three CPSUs on behalf of the state government in Itanagar in the presence of Power and New and Renewable Energy Minister, R K Singh, State Chief Minister Pema Khandu, and his Deputy CM Chowna Mein.

Protesters voiced strong opposition to the government's plans, claiming a lack of consent, consultation, and warning of the disastrous consequences of such large hydropower projects, particularly a proposed 10,000 MW dam on the Siang River. They argue that these developments threaten both their land and ecological balance.

Water resources experts said that the 12 power projects in Arunachal Pradesh that were officially handed over to three Central public sector undertakings (CPSUs) on August 12 are "economically unviable".

A significant rally took place on 14 September 2023, in Geku Village, where over 7,000 attendees pledged against the Siang Dam, led by local priests. An Assam-based hydrologist, who did not want to be named, said these projects should not have been taken up in the first place. “Apart from being unviable, these guarantee disaster for Arunachal Pradesh and downstream regions in Assam,” he said.

Despite the protests, the government is committed to the projects. Manohar Lal, Union Minister of Power and Housing & Urban Affairs, on 8 July 2024, during his visit highlighted that Arunachal Pradesh has about 38 percent (about 50 GW) of India’s total hydropower potential. On the same day, activist lawyer Ebo Mili and Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) convener Dunge Apang were detained by the state government. They were released after over 10 hours of detention after signing a Rs 50,000 bond to keep peace until one year or the completion of ongoing inquiry.

On 23 May 2025, protests erupted in Beging village, Siang district, against the deployment of 100 Central Armed Police Force personnel for a pre-feasibility survey related to the SUMP. Villagers burned a hanging bridge to block access and demanded the removal of armed forces and drilling equipment. A few days later, the Ekhomey Mowo Welfare Society in Dibang Valley opposed the 400 MW Mihundo Hydroelectric Project, citing a lack of free, prior, and informed consent.

On 14 July 2025, over 1,000 villagers rallied in Geku, Upper Siang, reinforcing their opposition to the 11,000–12,500 MW SUMP. The Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) vowed to continue peaceful protests until the project is canceled.

Meanwhile, the Arunachal Pradesh government, under Chief Minister Pema Khandu, has declared 2025–2035 the "Decade of Hydropower," aiming to generate 58,000 MW with investments exceeding Rs 2 lakh crore. The government justifies these projects as vital for national interests, particularly to counter China’s upstream dams on the Yarlung Tsangpo River. However, Khandu has publicly stated that projects like the SUMP will not proceed without local consent.

Local communities fear the submersion of fertile lands, villages, and sacred sites, alongside environmental risks in a seismically active region rich in biodiversity. Rights groups, including Manipur’s Centre for Research and Advocacy, have condemned the government’s actions, particularly the detention of activists like Ebo Mili, as violations of indigenous rights, according to The Hindu.

“The deputy commissioner of Siang asked us not to oppose the dam,” said Tarok Siram, the headman of Parong village. “I told him to take the opinion of 116 families in my village. I pointed out that the homes of 43 families will be under waterif the dam is built here. The remaining families will have to be relocated.”

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

4

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 107

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Details of Sources: Bhanu Tatak, Dibang Resistance, Alifa Zibran Names of Accused: Ebo Mili, Mejo Mihu, Nilim Mahanta

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Water bodies, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

No

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

126000

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

National Thermal Power Corporation, Ministry of Power, Government of India, Urban Affairs department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd (NEEPCO), Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam (SJVN), National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC), HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH LIMITED, Office of the Chairman cum Managing Director

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Acheso Atih Welfare Society (AAWA), All Adi welfare society (AAWS), Siang Indigenous Farmer's Forum (SIFF)

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

4

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 107

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia

East Street Journal Asia is a multilingual, Web-based news journal. It is an independent media organisation whose goal is to make transparent, unbiased and data-driven journalism accessible to all.

Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Yes

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Ebo Mili was released after 8 hours of interrogation and Bond signing. "U/S 107 CrPc for 1 (one) year for keeping peace and good behavior for for an amount of Rs 10,000." Mejo Mihu was released with stern caution to refrain from any such "unlawful" activities in future.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Water bodies, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

No

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us