Congress leader Jairam Ramesh has renewed his criticism of the environmental clearance granted to the Great Nicobar Island (GNI) Project, arguing that the approval process did not rest on sufficiently comprehensive environmental impact studies and calling for fresh assessments covering multiple seasons.

In a letter dated June 3 to Union Environment, Forest and Climate Change Minister Bhupender Yadav, the Rajya Sabha MP said the minister’s earlier response effectively acknowledged that the project’s environmental clearance was not based on three-season primary data collection.

According to Ramesh, the clearance relied on a single seasonal cycle supplemented by historical datasets, a methodology he contends is inadequate for a project of such scale and ecological significance.

“Is it not prudent to conduct comprehensive EIA studies over three seasons to account for seasonal variations?” Ramesh asked, The Indian Express reported.

He also pointed out that faced with “incontrovertible evidence of its hugely adverse ecological impacts”, the Union government is now emphasising the GNI project’s “supposed strategic rationale”.

The latest exchange follows Ramesh’s May 10 letter, in which he questioned the adequacy of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process and alleged that it fell short of legal requirements because baseline data had been collected during only one seasonal cycle.

Responding on May 27, Yadav rejected those allegations and maintained that the assessment process was robust. The minister stated that “while primary field data were collected over a single seasonal cycle, the analysis was integrated with long-term historical datasets maintained by reputed institutions”, which possessed decades of ecological research experience in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Yadav further argued that concerns regarding biodiversity and environmental impacts had already been addressed through statutory appraisal mechanisms and judicial review processes. He noted that issues related to environmental impact assessment and biodiversity impacts had “already been examined in detail during the statutory appraisal and subsequent judicially mandated review process”.

Ramesh, however, remained unconvinced, stressing that “secondary data is just not a substitute for primary data collection and project-specific studies”.

The proposed Great Nicobar Island Project covers an area of 166 square kilometres and includes plans for a transhipment container port, an international airport for military and civilian use, power infrastructure and a greenfield coastal city. The project is expected to involve the diversion of around 13,000 hectares of forest land in one of the country’s most ecologically sensitive regions.

The Congress leader also challenged the government’s reliance on National Green Tribunal rulings as evidence that due process had been followed.

Referring to NGT judgments dated April 3, 2023 and February 16, 2026, he noted that the latter order had referred to the ministry’s own submissions regarding erosion at Galathea Bay and highlighted that ports are prohibited in “high erosion stretches.”

Ramesh additionally reiterated his demand for the public release of the report prepared by a high-powered committee tasked with re-examining the project’s environmental clearance. Questioning why such a review should remain confidential, he argued that transparency was essential given the project's environmental implications.

The latest correspondence adds to the continuing debate over the Great Nicobar Island Project, with critics seeking more extensive ecological studies and greater public disclosure, while the government maintains that the clearance process has already undergone detailed scrutiny through statutory and judicial mechanisms.