By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel
When the authorities turn a blind eye to a problem despite repeated appeals, a fast unto death is often perceived as the last resort to safeguard the rights of the people. This is exactly what is happening in our southern neighbour, India, at present. Climate activist and education reformer Sonam Wangchuk was staging a fast unto death at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi. But why? Later, as his health deteriorated, the local police took him from the protest venue and admitted him to a hospital.
Ever since India gained independence from British rule, it has witnessed several fasts unto death at different points in time. In October 1952, social activist Potti Sriramulu began an indefinite fast demanding a separate state for Telugu speakers. Having previously undertaken several fasts for social causes, he believed that only self-sacrifice could compel New Delhi to listen. On the 58th day of his fast, he died. Crowds took to the streets across the Telugu-speaking regions. Several buildings were damaged, railway lines were blocked, and many people died in the unrest that followed. Subsequently, then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru announced the creation of Andhra State.
Fast forward to 2011, when anti-corruption campaigner Anna Hazare launched a hunger strike demanding the enactment of the Lokpal Bill to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman. His movement, popularly known as India Against Corruption, attracted millions of supporters across the country and pressured Parliament to consider the proposed legislation. Following sustained public pressure, Parliament passed the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. Although some of his demands were met, others remained unfulfilled.
More than a decade later, education reformer and climate activist Sonam Wangchuk is staging an indefinite fast unto death at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi. What compelled him to resort to a hunger strike? Is he demanding statehood for Ladakh or pursuing another cause? The following paragraphs explain the reasons behind his protest.
The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate), or NEET-UG, is India’s sole national-level entrance examination for admission to undergraduate medical courses. It is a highly competitive, single-window examination that high school graduates must pass to secure admission to medical and dental colleges across the country. However, the examination was marred by allegations of question paper leaks, triggering widespread outrage among students. The controversy gained national attention after whistleblowers claimed that questions matching the NEET examination had circulated on Telegram shortly after the May 3 examination concluded. Following widespread protests, the May 3 examination was cancelled, and a re-examination was held on June 21, 2026.
Amid this controversy, a youth-led movement against corruption, misrule and poor governance, led by Abhijeet Dipke, gained momentum on social media. Through memes and satire, he criticised the incumbent government for its alleged failure to prevent the paper leak. His remarks reportedly drew criticism from the Chief Justice of India, who allegedly compared the nation’s youth to cockroaches. In response, Dipke named his movement the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP).
In the days that followed, the Cockroach Janata Party organised a massive rally in New Delhi. Thousands of young people from across the country participated in the demonstration, demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over the alleged examination irregularities.
The greatest irony is that the protesters’ demands fell on deaf ears, with the government refusing to respond. Despite peaceful demonstrations, public appeals and repeated calls for accountability, those in power chose to remain silent. Instead of engaging with the youth, the government ignored their grievances, leaving many frustrated, disillusioned and excluded from the decision-making process.
It was at this point that Sonam Wangchuk joined hands with the Cockroach Janata Party in solidarity with its members. An education reformer, environmental activist, innovator and engineer, Wangchuk announced a fast unto death after the CJP’s demands were given short shrift.
The 59-year-old Wangchuk has expressed his support for the CJP’s campaign for educational reform. He has been observing his hunger strike in the scorching summer heat, surviving only on water and salt. According to media reports, he has already lost 9 kg, and his health condition is said to be deteriorating.
In a country where the government is perceived to be unresponsive and unaccountable, citizens may feel compelled to adopt a fast unto death as a last resort to make their voices heard. Yet what is particularly surprising is the extent to which the government is alleged to have sought to silence dissenting voices.
The Modi-led government has accused Wangchuk of being a pro-China activist. It has also alleged that he made provocative remarks that incited people to take the law into their own hands during a demonstration. Under his leadership, a peaceful protest demanding statehood or Sixth Schedule protection for Ladakh was held last year. According to these accounts, the demonstration turned violent following police intervention, resulting in the deaths of four civilians. On September 25 last year, Wangchuk was arrested under India’s National Security Act (NSA) and remained in preventive detention for nearly six months. Following widespread protests against his detention, he was released from Jodhpur Jail on March 14, 2026.
As thinking individuals, citizens have the right to protest and demand accountability and transparency from their government. Such actions strengthen democracy rather than weaken it. India, which claims to be the world’s largest democracy, should address such issues through dialogue and negotiation. It cannot, and should not, evade its responsibility when citizens raise concerns about poor governance, misrule and irregularities.
If Sonam Wangchuk has indeed resorted to a fast unto death, it suggests that he believes there are serious shortcomings in the government’s handling of the issues he has raised. The New Delhi administration should not dismiss the matter as routine. Any delay in initiating dialogue with the agitating group could have serious consequences.
Login to add a comment