The Ladakh Civil Society Forum has urged the Centre and the Union Territory administration to immediately hold panchayat and Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council elections across all eight districts, amid concern over stalled discussions on constitutional safeguards for the region.
The forum passed a resolution in Leh on Thursday, alleging that a strategy of delay and confrontational politics had weakened the consensus reached during earlier rounds of talks with the Centre. It called for the government to resume the dialogue and restore momentum on measures intended to protect Ladakh’s land, culture, natural resources and economic interests.
The demand places elected local institutions at the centre of the forum’s response. It said functioning panchayats and hill councils would strengthen grassroots democracy and provide an immediate institutional mechanism for protecting the region’s interests. The forum specifically sought elections in all eight districts rather than limiting representation to selected local bodies.
Ladakh’s civil society groups have previously used constitutional safeguards as a framework for raising concerns about land ownership, cultural identity, resource management and the region’s economic future. The latest resolution links those concerns to the absence of elected district-level institutions and to the continuing uncertainty around the Centre’s engagement with local representatives.
According to the forum, elected panchayats and hill councils could help address these issues through local decision-making. Its resolution said such bodies were necessary to protect Ladakh’s land, culture, natural resources and economic interests. The statement, however, did not provide a proposed election schedule, identify a specific date for the resumption of talks or detail the constitutional provisions being sought.
The forum’s appeal now puts the next steps with the Centre and the Union Territory administration, which it has asked to conduct the local elections and resume discussions on safeguards. The report did not include a response from either authority or indicate whether an election timetable had been announced.
