Sonam Wangchuk Claims Malice Behind Detention to Supreme Court
Synced from Source
NEW DELHI: Sonam Wangchuk, a climate activist, argued before the Supreme Court that his detention was tainted by malice from authorities. He claimed his peace messages were ignored, leading to wrongful confinement under the National Security Act. The court has scheduled a status hearing for January 12.
NEW DELHI: Sonam Wangchuk, a notable climate activist and advocate for Ladakhi statehood, made a compelling case to the Supreme Court about the wrongful nature of his detention, asserting that it was influenced by malice from authorities. Wangchuk was detained under the National Security Act (NSA) on September 26, 2025, following violent protests for statehood in Ladakh that resulted in multiple fatalities. His detention sparked outrage as it coincided with a critical period of political discussions regarding preservation of rights for the region.
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Wangchuk and his wife Gitanjali Angmo, argued that local authorities had "hidden" crucial video messages in which Wangchuk urged peace following the unrest. These messages were not presented to the detaining authority, Sibal claimed, leading to a significant miscarriage of justice. “Is it not the duty of the local authorities to hand over the videos to the detaining authority?” Sibal questioned, emphasizing that Wangchuk's messages clearly denoted a stance against violence.
Angmo accused the Ministry of Home Affairs of having reservations about Wangchuk's participation in discussions about Ladakh's political future. With upcoming elections for the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Sibal indicated that the actions against Wangchuk appeared strategically timed to undermine his influence in political conversations. He noted that allegations against Wangchuk arose only months prior to these elections, coinciding with his vocal advocacy for promised rights under the Sixth Schedule.
The timeline surrounding Wangchuk's detention has raised further concerns, with Sibal stating that the full grounds for his detention were not provided until 28 days later, far beyond the ten-day requirement stated in the NSA. This delay prevented Wangchuk from making an informed representation against his order. The court has set a follow-up hearing for January 12, where these serious allegations regarding procedural violations will be examined further.
Discussion
Loading comments...