Introduction
A region sharing three borders, Ladakh, has been protesting for its statehood for five years. It all started when the Indian Government revoked Article 370 and bifurcated the former state of Jammu & Kashmir into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir (with a legislature¹), and Ladakh (without a legislature) in August 2019. Since then, Ladakh has been directly governed by the central government with no elected local assembly or full democratic representation.
The Ladakhis feel excluded from decision-making because all major administrative powers rest with bureaucrats appointed by Delhi as there's no legislative assembly.
Sixth Schedule Demand
The Sixth Schedule is a special constitutional provision (Articles 244(2) and 275(1)) that gives autonomous self-governance to certain tribal and indigenous regions of India in the North-East (Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura). After becoming a UT (Union Territory), Ladakh lost the constitutional safeguards that earlier prevented outsiders from buying land or taking local jobs. Now, without those laws, Ladakhis fear outsiders might buy land, threatening their small population and traditional ownership systems. Sixth Schedule would legally restrict non-tribals from owning or exploiting land.
Ladakh is home to distinct Buddhist and Shia Muslim communities with unique cultures, languages, and traditions. People fear that central rule might dilute their cultural autonomy or ignore their heritage. The region is also ecologically fragile, glaciers, high-altitude deserts, and limited water. Local councils could decide how tourism, mining, and construction are regulated to prevent ecological harm. Sixth Schedule would give governance back to locals, creating an elected autonomous council that can plan development and employment according to local needs.
¹Legislature: the part of a government that makes rules, passes laws, and represents the people through elected members.
Protests
Over the years, local groups such as the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) have raised grievances about land rights, job/ domicile protections, cultural identity and lack of a local legislative assembly. A key figure of the protest, Sonam Wangchuk, was arrested on 26 September 2025 and several reasons/accusations have been made by authorities.
Over recent years Wangchuk has taken up the cause of local rights in Ladakh: demanding more constitutional safeguards, greater autonomy, protections for land, jobs, culture and environment. He also participated in hunger strikes and public protests pressing for these demands (including statehood for Ladakh and inclusion under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution).
On 10 September 2025, Sonam Wangchuk and others launched a hunger strike demanding: statehood for Ladakh, inclusion under the Sixth Schedule. Two of the hunger-strikers fell seriously ill around 23 September, prompting the youth wing of the LAB to call for a full shutdown and a demonstration on 24 September in Leh (capital of Ladakh UT). The scheduled talks with the centre were set for 6 October, but protesters felt the delay meant inaction, sparking impatience.
On 24 September 2025, hundreds of youth and other protesters gathered in Leh to press the demands which took a violent turn: demonstrators set fire to the local office of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Leh, burnt a police/paramilitary vehicle, clashed with police who responded with tear-gas, baton-charges and later, live fire. The authorities reported at least four people killed and dozens injured.
After effects
Restrictions and curfews still partially in place in Leh; protests have been paused but tensions remain high. Authorities allege that Wangchuk incited violence, they say his speeches and hunger strike were used by some elements to inflame the situation. For example: the UT police chief said Wangchuk's protest platform provided space for violence, "elements" he claimed were "invited to vitiate peace & law and order". The central government also revoked the FCRA (Foreign Contribution Regulation Act) licence of his NGO SECMOL, citing alleged violations in foreign funding. he was held under the stringent National Security Act, 1980 (NSA), which allows for preventive/detention measures without trial for up to a year in certain circumstances. The authorities also cited potential "foreign link"/"Pakistan link" allegations: the Ladakh DGP claimed Wangchuk had visited Pakistan/Bangladesh and was in contact with persons of Pakistani origin, though these are stated as under investigation.
Wangchuk denies the allegations of incitement. He says his movement was peaceful, the violence was triggered by youth acting separately and frustrations over unfulfilled promises. He views the arrest and the FCRA cancellation as a "scapegoat tactic" aimed at silencing the movement rather than engaging with the core demands. Some local organisations (such as the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance) have supported him and defended the essentially peaceful nature of the movement (while condemning the violence). The centre responded: The Ministry of Home Affairs accused Wangchuk of making "provocative" speeches and blamed "mob violence" for the deaths.
Conclusion
The recent Ladakh protests mark a major escalation in a long-running movement. What began as peaceful demands has turned deadly showing deep frustration in a region that feels its constitutional, cultural, environmental and political concerns are not being addressed. The deaths have increased the urgency of the issues, and the government now faces pressure both to act and to maintain order.
Wangchuk's arrest marks a tipping point in the Ladakh statehood/autonomy movement – the central government is signalling a hard line. It highlights tensions between local demands in a sensitive border region (Ladakh borders both China and Pakistan) and national security/central governance concerns. It raises questions about freedom of protest, space for dissent, and how demands for decentralisation/autonomy are handled in India's federal system. For Ladakhis, the arrest of a prominent local figure like Wangchuk deepens distrust in the process of negotiation with the central government (over statehood/ Sixth Schedule inclusion).
WRITTEN AND DESIGNED BY EFTEKHER ANOWER NAHIN 62664057
