By Sandeep Pandey and Gunjan Singh for India Tomorrow
LUCKNOW: A movement had been going on in Ladakh demanding inclusion of Ladakh in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, full statehood, two Lok Sabha constituencies, and a separate Public Service Commission for Ladakh.
In September 2025, Sonam Wangchuk began his fifth hunger strike in Leh. On 24 September, tensions suddenly increased as young people became more aggressive. They had grown frustrated with the slow government response and with the worsening condition of people who had been fasting, some of whom had to be hospitalised.
The situation turned violent, and the police opened fire. Four young people were killed and 44 others were injured. Cases were registered against several people. A few days later, another young man died by suicide, reportedly amid frustration and shock following the firing.
In the face of the violence, Sonam Wangchuk ended his hunger strike. However, two days later, on 26 September, he was arrested.
The National Security Act (NSA) was invoked against Sonam Wangchuk, and he spent the next six months in Jodhpur jail. The government later decided to withdraw the case against him, allowing him to be released. However, no one was held accountable for his arrest or for the use of the NSA against him. Before his arrest, the government had also made allegations against Wangchuk that were widely seen as an attempt to damage his reputation. These developments raised concerns about the arbitrary use of state power.
Following the violence, and in response to public demands, a judicial inquiry was set up to investigate the events. However, the inquiry has not produced any publicly known outcome so far.
For almost a year, there was no major agitation in Ladakh, amid what many protesters regarded as a repressive government response. When the movement resumed, a fifth demand was added to the four earlier demands: justice for those killed or injured in the violence, justice for their families, and withdrawal of the cases registered against people in connection with the 24 September incident.
Exactly one year after the violence, two public meetings were organised in Ladakh. On 23 September, a short march began from the bus stand in Kargil and ended at Hussaini Park, where a public meeting was held.
The meeting was addressed by leaders of the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), as well as representatives of various religious, social and political organisations. Sajjad Kargili, Co-Chairperson of the KDA, conducted the meeting. Ladakh’s only sitting Member of Parliament, Hanifa Jan, and the other KDA Co-Chairperson, Asgar Karbalai, also addressed the gathering.
Students from Delhi University, members of the Socialist Party (India) from Uttar Pradesh, and a farmers’ leader from Madhya Pradesh attended the meeting to express their solidarity with the people of Ladakh.
Addressing the predominantly Shia gathering, Sajjad Kargili urged people to reflect on the connection between their expressions of solidarity with Palestine and the legacy of Imam Hussain. He argued that raising slogans in support of Palestinian freedom or invoking the sacrifice of Imam Hussain should also inspire people to stand up against injustice in their own society.
On 24 September, a prayer meeting was held at NDS Memorial Park in Leh to remember those who had lost their lives in the struggle for Ladakh’s demands. Buddhist monks from different traditions participated in the prayers. This was followed by a public meeting at the NDS Stadium.
The significance of the meeting lay in the fact that the leadership of the two major organisations representing Leh and Kargil—the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA)—came together on a common platform to reiterate their demands. Both organisations have participated in dialogues with the government on issues concerning the people of Ladakh. Their joint appearance at the meeting demonstrated a sense of unity between the predominantly Buddhist population of Leh and the predominantly Shia Muslim population of Kargil.
It is important to note that tensions between the leadership of the two communities have, at various times, been a subject of political contention. Critics of the government have also alleged that attempts have been made to create divisions between the two communities. More broadly, debates over communal polarisation and the politics of division have become an important feature of Indian political discourse, including in relation to Hindu-Muslim relations in different parts of the country and the conflict between the Meitei and Kuki communities in Manipur, which has also affected the Naga population.
Against this wider backdrop, the Buddhist-Muslim cooperation in Ladakh presents an important example of two communities coming together around shared political and constitutional demands. Rather than allowing differences of religion or region to divide them, the people of Leh and Kargil have sought to present a united front through the LAB-KDA alliance. Their cooperation demonstrates how common concerns can bring different communities together and offers an example of inter-community solidarity that may be relevant to other parts of India.
Sonam Wangchuk spoke at length at the meeting and was the main speaker. He claimed that Union Home Minister Amit Shah had initially indicated support for granting Ladakh protections under the Sixth Schedule, but later on, went back on that position. Recalling meetings between Ladakhi representatives and the Centre, Wangchuk alleged that Shah had told the LAB-KDA leadership that even if the Prime Minister agreed in writing to grant Sixth Schedule status to Ladakh, he would not allow it to happen. These claims were also reported in the media following Wangchuk’s speech.
Wangchuk argued that this alleged reversal by the Centre created deep frustration among Ladakh’s youth and contributed to the escalation of the movement that culminated in the violence of 24 September 2025. He therefore held Amit Shah politically responsible for the events and demanded his resignation. His argument was that had the government honoured its earlier commitments, the prolonged agitation and the subsequent violence might have been avoided. This was Wangchuk’s political assessment of the causes of the violence, rather than an established finding of the judicial inquiry.
Wangchuk also referred to recent demands for ministerial accountability in cases involving alleged government failures. He cited Rahul Gandhi’s criticism of the use of force against protesters at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar and argued that, by the same logic, there was a case for demanding Amit Shah’s resignation over the deaths of the four young men in Ladakh. Wangchuk asserted that the Home Minister should take responsibility for the violence and the deaths.
Sonam Wangchuk said that he had already faced various forms of government pressure and repression, including imprisonment, the withdrawal of permission for land allotted to his organisation for educational purposes, and repeated inquiries into his educational institution. He said that, having faced these measures, the only remaining step the government could take against him was to kill him in an encounter. He added that he was prepared to face even that possibility.
Wangchuk’s willingness to put his own life at risk has, according to supporters of the movement, strengthened the resolve and courage of many people in Ladakh. His stance has encouraged them to continue their struggle for justice and for the political and constitutional demands being raised by the LAB-KDA leadership.
The movement is now entering another critical phase. Unless Parliament passes legislation addressing the demands put forward by the LAB-KDA leadership during the winter session, the agitation is likely to intensify in the coming year. The coming months will therefore be crucial for determining whether the government and the movement’s leadership can find a political and constitutional resolution to the long-standing demands of the people of Ladakh.
*Sandeep Pandey is Secretary General of Socialist Party (India) and Gunjan Singh is with PUCL, Kanpur.
