Ladakh activist questions timing of festival during anniversary commemorations

Educator and activist Gitanjali J. Angmo has questioned the timing of the Ladakh Festival, which began on Saturday during a period of remembrance for violence and arrests in the Union Territory last year. The administration scheduled the festival from September 26 to 28, describing it as an event bringing together local artisans, performers and visitors.

The dates coincide with “Martyrs Month”, observed in memory of four Leh residents killed during an agitation in September 2025 and the subsequent arrest of Angmo’s husband, activist Sonam Wangchuk. Four people were killed in firing by security forces on September 24 last year, according to the source material. Wangchuk was arrested two days later and jailed under the National Security Act.

Saturday also marked one year since his detention. In a post on X, Angmo said the dates carried memories of violence, deaths, injuries, arrests and imprisonment that were still recent. She called on people who supported Ladakh’s demands for constitutional safeguards, environmental protection, identity and democratic rights to mark the period with remembrance and solidarity rather than allowing celebrations to obscure those issues.

Wangchuk separately apologised for earlier remarks comparing conditions in Ladakh with those in Tibet. The Central Tibetan Administration had criticised the comparison as misplaced and inaccurate. In a video statement, Wangchuk said he understood the suffering of Tibetans and had opposed Chinese repression.

He said his remarks were directed at what he described as the situation under the current regime, rather than at India. He referred to deaths, injuries, arrests and a suicide during the events in Ladakh, and questioned whether political accountability had followed. Angmo said the events of the previous year should not be treated as distant history.

She urged residents to remain focused on the wider political demands and on questions that, in her view, remained unanswered. The source material does not provide a response from the Ladakh administration to her criticism.