TranscriptArunachal Press Club, Itanagar5 November 2026

“No more talks” Katon Moyong on the Siang dam

Anti-dam activist Katon Moyong, known as Aborman, rejected the government’s invitation to talks on the Siang Upper Multipurpose Project days after Delhi Police detained him at a protest outside Arunachal Bhawan. This is the full press conference, with a machine transcript.

Source
The Arunachal Times on X
Posted
Length
40:59
Language
English

Katon Moyong speaks in Adi dress at the Arunachal Press Club. Video: The Arunachal Times; mirrored here so the transcript can follow it.

What is SUMP?

Context compiled 6 Nov 2026 from news reports. Footnotes below.

The Siang Upper Multipurpose Project is a proposed storage dam on the Siang river in Upper Siang and Siang districts, the homeland of the Adi people. NHPC is preparing its pre-feasibility report (PFR) for the Ministry of Jal Shakti.2 On 3 November 2026 Chief Minister Pema Khandu said no decision to build it has been taken.3

Government case Store water against floods, dry-season shortages and sudden releases from China’s 60,000 MW Medog project upstream on the Yarlung Tsangpo, where construction began on 19 July 2025.3911

Community case Submergence of Adi villages and farmland. Communities also reject the armed-police deployment used to force survey drilling, and dispute the village MoUs presented as consent.6812

  • 11,000–12,500 MWReported capacity. Press figures range from 11,000 to 12,500 MW and no PFR is published4578
  • ≈9.2 bn m³Proposed live storage2
  • 27 / 43Villages fully submerged / affected, according to SIFF6
  • 69Arrests after the 23 Oct 2026 Pasighat violence, as of 29 Oct7

Timeline

  1. The Centre declares a Siang storage project a national project.3
  2. NHPC drafts a PFR assessing three sites: Dite Dime, Ugeng and Parong.6
  3. Central forces deploy at Beging for survey drilling. Villagers begin an indefinite dharna at the site.8
  4. Riga, Riew, Beging, Parong, Karko and Komkar sign MoUs agreeing to the PFR. Some residents dispute them.1314
  5. The chief minister invites the Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) to talks and agrees in principle to cut forces and withdraw FIRs.1617
  6. After a 12-hour bandh, the NHPC office and a police station in Pasighat are set on fire.518
  7. Delhi Police detain about 40 protesters, Katon Moyong among them, outside Arunachal Bhawan, Delhi.1920
  8. Moyong rejects the government’s invitation to talks. This recording.

One river, three names

Map: Natural Earth 1:10m, India’s official boundary view. Site positions are approximate.

Map of the Yarlung Tsangpo, Siang and Brahmaputra The Yarlung Tsangpo flows east across Tibet, turns south at the Great Bend near Medog where China is building a 60 GW project, enters Arunachal Pradesh as the Siang past the proposed SUMP site in Upper Siang, reaches Pasighat, and becomes the Brahmaputra flowing west through Assam into Bangladesh. Circles show Census 2011 Adi population by district. India China Bhutan Myanmar Bangladesh Nepal Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim West Bengal Assam Nagaland Manipur Tripura Meghalaya Bihar Brahmaputra valley, Assam2.76 crore people TIBET (CHINA) ARUNACHAL PRADESH ASSAM BHUTAN BANGLADESH East Siang: 61,938 Adi (Census 2011) West Siang: 33,917 Adi (Census 2011) Upper Siang: 25,451 Adi (Census 2011) Lower Dibang Valley: 12,847 Adi (Census 2011) Lohit: 10,488 Adi (Census 2011) Papum Pare: 6,040 Adi (Census 2011) Adi population by district, Census 2011 Medog60 GW, China Great Bend SUMP siteproposed, Upper Siang Pasighat Dibrugarh Guwahati Itanagar Yarlung Tsangpo Siang Brahmaputra
  1. 01

    Yarlung Tsangpo

    The river rises in western Tibet and flows east across the plateau at 3,000–4,000 metres.

  2. 02

    The Great Bend

    At Namcha Barwa the river turns sharply south and drops about 2,000 metres in roughly 50 km. China began building its 60,000 MW Medog project here in July 2025. Reports describe tunnels about 20 km long, drilled through the mountain, that divert flow to five cascade stations.927

  3. 03

    The Siang and SUMP

    The river enters Arunachal Pradesh as the Siang. NHPC’s preferred SUMP site, at Parong in Upper Siang, would hold about 9.2 billion m³ of live storage behind a dam reported at 250 m high.26

  4. 04

    The Adi homeland

    The 2011 census counted 1,57,657 Adi, nearly all along the Siang and its neighbouring valleys. Circle area is proportional to each district’s count.21

  5. 05

    The Brahmaputra valley

    Below Pasighat the Siang meets the Dibang and Lohit to form the Brahmaputra. In 2011, 2.76 crore people lived in Assam’s Brahmaputra valley, and the river continues into Bangladesh.22

Moyong’s argument

His case, in his words, with timestamps. Claims are his own unless footnoted.

  1. 01

    Consent, not conquest

    “You came with books and medicine, we respected that… If you come with guns, if you come with armies, that’s how we’ll retaliate.” 01:46

    The Adi joined India by consent and were never conquered by Tibet, the Ahoms or the British. He says that bargain sets the limit on what the state may take.

  2. 02

    A 47-year refusal

    “It is a 47-year-old fight of Abor people, the Adi people.” 02:42

    He counts three attempts: a Brahmaputra flood-control proposal in 1979, a set of Lower and Upper Siang projects from 2003 to 2022, and SUMP from 2022. Each time, he says, the traditional councils refused.

  3. 03

    The reason keeps changing

    “1979, flood mitigation, 2008, national interest, 2017, national project, and 2026… national security and water bomb.” 13:45

    He argues that a project whose stated purpose keeps shifting is looking for a reason, not answering a need.

  4. 04

    Medog is not a water bomb

    “It’s not a dam. It’s a run-of-river project… They’re not storing the water.” 17:36

    He argues that China is diverting flow through tunnels at the Great Bend rather than storing it behind a wall, so the flood-cushion case falls away. Published descriptions of tunnels and cascade stations broadly match his account.27 Whether Medog changes flows downstream has not been settled.

  5. 05

    Diplomacy, not dams

    “It’s your duty to go to China and talk with their diplomats.” 20:07

    On his account, a water-sharing deal with China is the government’s job. It should not be pushed onto Adi villagers as a reservoir.

  6. 06

    A militarised valley

    “For every six Adi people, there’s one armed personnel.” 20:45

    He says law only binds when “both the parties are equal” (31:52). An armed force at the farm gate, in his view, makes consultation coercive. The ratio is his figure and has not been verified.

  7. 07

    The rivers were sold behind their backs

    “He signed more than 145 MOUs… with 65 hydropower companies.” 09:02

    He says state governments signed hydropower agreements for 45,000 MW between 1987 and 2015, with upfront premiums but no benefit to the villages. He displays documents but has not released them, and the page has not verified the figures.

  8. 08

    Development, yes; the main stem, no

    “You can build dams in the tributaries, but not in the main stem.” 24:43

    He says he is not against development, and asks for border trade with China (35:57). His line is the Siang itself: “Discussion ka time khatam ho gaya” — the time for discussion is over.

Representation: his claim vs the record

He saysThe record shows
He speaks for “the 39 traditional village councils” (00:20). Later it is “my 60 village councils” (26:39).The count changes within the same press conference. No council resolution has been published.
“99% is not accepting this dam and nobody gave you MOU” (27:23).Riga, Riew, Beging, Parong, Karko and Komkar signed MoUs for the pre-feasibility survey between July and December 2025. The state says Parong signed with 62% of households.1314
MoUs were extracted by setting villages against each other, “divide and rule” (26:52).Some residents dispute the MoUs.8 The MoUs consent only to a survey, not to the dam.

What is not known: nobody has surveyed Adi opinion. Neither his 99% nor the government’s MoUs measure how many Adi support or oppose the dam. Opposition is clearly organised and vocal, but how much of the community it represents is unmeasured.

Tone

He does not insult the villages that signed; he casts them as pressured. His contempt goes at politicians and officials:

  • “idiot political parties” 02:50
  • BJP leaders “bootlicking” the Centre 21:42
  • “eat your commission… for your corrupt means” 19:20
  • “You are a failed politician and bureaucrat” 20:22
  • “more than 200 MPs are murderers, rapists, uneducated” 38:53
  • To social-media commenters: “You fools” 17:41

Toward the armed forces it turns to threat. They “will be removed peacefully or by force soon” (21:17), and the dam cannot happen unless the state is willing to “exterminate” the Adi (25:38). His call for diplomacy with China (20:07) is made the same way, as an accusation of incompetence rather than a proposal.

Individual rights vs the greater good

Population figures: Census of India 2011, the latest count. Each side's argument is summarised here, not endorsed.

Moyong says he speaks for the Adi village councils of the Siang: 39 of them at one point (00:20) and 60 at another (26:39). The government says the dam would protect the far larger population living downstream. The bars below show both groups at the same scale.

  • Adi people in Arunachal Pradesh211,57,657
  • … of whom live in Upper Siang, the dam district2125,451
  • People in Assam hit by floods in an average year, 1953–201624≈26,00,000
  • Population of Assam’s Brahmaputra valley222,75,80,977
Linear scale. The Brahmaputra valley holds about 175 people for every Adi. The Adi count is Census 2011, ST-15 table. It adds the tribes enumerated as Adi, Abor and the Adi sub-groups (Minyong, Padam, Pasi, Bori, Bokar, Pailibo, Ramo, Ashing, Millang, Simong, Pangi, Karka, Komkar, Tangam). It excludes the Galo (79,327), who are now a separate tribe. Community leaders put the Adi at about 3 lakh today.26 District table (CSV)

Rights The case for the Adi veto

  • The cost falls on a small, identifiable group. The Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) says 27 villages would be fully submerged and 43 affected.6 Ancestral land lost to a reservoir cannot be recovered.
  • Consent has been sought under armed deployment, and some residents dispute the village MoUs.813 Moyong calls this a 47-year fight (02:42).
  • The benefit is not established. The pre-feasibility report is unpublished, and no study has said how many people downstream the reservoir would protect.

Greater good The case for the dam

  • About 2.76 crore people live in the Brahmaputra valley that the Siang feeds.22 In the Rashtriya Barh Ayog’s assessment, 39.58% of Assam’s land is flood-prone.23
  • China is building a 60,000 MW project at Medog, upstream on the same river.11 A 2022 Ministry of Jal Shakti report says SUMP “will act as a flood cushion” against sudden releases from it.25
  • Proposed live storage of about 9.2 bn m³ would give India its own water reserve on the river.2

What the numbers do not settle

  1. The 2.76 crore figure measures exposure, not protection. It counts everyone living in the Brahmaputra valley. It does not count the people a Siang reservoir would actually shield. Experts quoted by Scroll argue that a hydropower reservoir is kept full and could even out releases from Medog “for a few days” at most.25 Until the pre-feasibility report is published, nobody outside government can size the cover.
  2. The Adi do not speak with one voice. Moyong speaks for the councils that oppose the dam. Riga, Riew, Beging, Parong, Karko and Komkar have signed MoUs.13 How many of the 1.58 lakh Adi either side represents is not on record.
  3. Judgment, not data: The headcount ratio sizes the two groups but does not decide between them. Whether a majority’s benefit can override a minority’s land rights is a question of law and values. Arithmetic cannot settle it, and the size of the benefit is itself unproven.

Rights in the Republic

What Indian law gives a citizen, and a tribal community, when the state wants their land. Compiled 6 Nov 2026. This is not legal advice.

Moyong appeals to a bargain made in the 1950s (“you came with books and medicine”) and to the authority of the traditional councils. The Constitution offers a different and narrower set of protections, and several of them stop at Arunachal’s border.

The key point

No Indian law requires the Adi villages to consent before land is taken for SUMP. The consent rules cover private and public-private projects, Fifth Schedule areas and recognised forest rights. Arunachal has no Scheduled Area, and it had filed no claims under the 2006 Forest Rights Act as of 31 Dec 2021. The village MoUs and the Chief Minister’s promise that the decision “will depend on consent” are therefore political commitments, not legal ones. (Judgment, from the statutes cited.)30313

  • Property

    A constitutional right, not a fundamental one

    Since the 44th Amendment (1978), Article 300A lets the state take property only by law, with fair procedure and compensation. It gives no right to refuse.28

  • Life and livelihood

    A right to be heard, not a veto

    Article 21 covers livelihood. In Olga Tellis (1985) the Supreme Court upheld the evictions but required a fair hearing first.29

  • Land acquisition

    The 2013 Act: assessment and compensation

    Acquisition for a public-sector company such as NHPC needs a social impact assessment, compensation and resettlement. The Act’s 80%/70% landowner-consent rule applies only to private and public-private projects.30

  • Scheduled Areas

    Arunachal is outside both Schedules

    Arunachal is in neither the Fifth nor the Sixth Schedule. So gram-sabha consent under the 2013 Act, PESA (the Panchayats Extension to Scheduled Areas Act) and the Samatha ruling do not reach Upper Siang.31

  • Article 371H

    Law and order, not land

    Arunachal’s special provision gives the Governor responsibility for law and order. Unlike Nagaland’s Article 371A, it does not protect land or customary law.32

  • Customary land

    The 1947 Jhum Regulation

    Customary jhum land can be taken with “no formal acquisition proceedings”: a show-cause hearing and compensation. Since the Mihin Laling judgment (2025), compensation cannot fall below 2013-Act levels.28

  • Precedent

    Narmada (2000)

    The Supreme Court held that displacement does not by itself violate fundamental rights if oustees are rehabilitated and left better off. It also declined to second-guess policy decisions on large dams.33

  • International

    Consent under UNDRIP

    Article 10 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) bars relocation without free, prior and informed consent. India voted for it in 2007, but declared its “entire population” indigenous. The declaration is not binding law.34

  • Protest

    Peaceably and without arms

    Article 19 protects speech and peaceful assembly, subject to reasonable restrictions. Courts have struck down blanket bans (MKSS, 2018) but allow protest to be confined to designated places (Shaheen Bagh, 2020). The Pasighat arson falls outside this protection.35

What the law does guarantee is process: an impact assessment, a hearing, compensation at the 2013 floor, rehabilitation, and the right to protest peacefully. Whether the state would use the 2013 Act or the 1947 Jhum Regulation for SUMP is not known.

Full transcript

Machine transcription. It may contain errors, so check against the video before quoting.

Loading transcript…