Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, in an exclusive interview with The Indian Express on Tuesday, said the 20-km padayatra with people from Kharoo village in Leh was shortened due to changing weather. He said the march was being held to remind the Centre of its promises to the people of Ladakh and demand justice for those who lost their lives a year ago.The 20-km padayatra is scheduled for September 23. It was initially planned to begin from Kargil but has now been shortened due to the changing season. The march will begin at a stupa being built by villagers in memory of those who died. It is being held ahead of the first anniversary of the September 24, 2025, violence in Leh.Wangchuk told The Indian Express that the padayatra was a tribute to those who were killed, injured or jailed while seeking safeguards for Ladakh’s environment and culture and the restoration of democracy in the Union Territory.“What do we want to achieve? One is that it is in memory of those who were martyred, those who got injured, and those who went to jail for the safeguards for Ladakh’s environment and culture and for reinstating democracy in Ladakh. We want to express our concern and grief about this,” Wangchuk said.Wangchuk also sought the findings of the judicial inquiry into last year’s violence, saying the report was needed to establish why the firing took place and who was responsible.The September 24, 2025, violence in Leh left four people dead. The UT administration later ordered a judicial inquiry into the incident.“We want the judicial inquiry commission report to know why and who is responsible,” Wangchuk told The Indian Express.Story continues below this adWangchuk said that the compensation offered to the victims’ families “felt like an insult”, citing Rs 15 lakh for the killed, Rs 1–3 lakh for those left permanently disabled.“This march will appeal to the government to reconsider the lives of people who have always stood for the nation. When we are talking of 1 crore for NEET exam suicides — these were people who had done nothing. They were just shot in cold blood. So they deserve at least similar consideration as other citizens in the nation,” he said.20-km Protest March, Bigger Demands: Sonam Wangchuk on Ladakh’s Fight for Rights”@neetas11 @Wangchuk66 pic.twitter.com/KVwrZzmUf1— The Indian Express (@IndianExpress) September 22, 2026September has been designated as martyrs’ month for those who died, were injured, or jailed while seeking safeguards for Ladakh’s land and culture and the restoration of democracy. September 24 will be observed as Shaheed Diwas, marking the first anniversary of last year’s violence, Wangchuk said.Wangchuk questioned why the findings of the inquiry had not been made public. He said transparency was necessary to establish whether there were shortcomings on the part of security forces and to prevent similar incidents from being repeated.“If there are any shortcomings from security forces, we should know and they should mend their ways so that it is never repeated, and those who were victims should be compensated adequately. We do ask for this report, and one year is a long time. People now fear that it’s because there are so many shortcomings on the part of the security forces that they are covering up this report. So it’s again breeding distrust,” he said.Story continues below this adBecause one thing is clear: there were no firing orders. They fired without orders and with AK-47s at their own citizens. You can imagine this is in the light of the fact that at Jantar Mantar they only used pellet guns, and that has become such a serious debate in the nation. So why this difference between citizens of the same country — one on the borders and the other in the capital? Why this difference?,” he added.Also Read | The journey of Sonam Wangchuk, the activist: Education to ecology to politicsOn Ladakh’s political demands, Wangchuk said the leadership had scaled down its original demands over the past six years. Full statehood and inclusion under the Sixth Schedule were the original demands. What is now on the table, he said, is a tailor-made arrangement under Article 371, including an elected assembly with democratic powers but short of a full statehood, as New Delhi says Ladakh does not yet have the revenue.“The problem is that even after Ladakh came down to something less than what they were promised and they were asking, there are a lot of undercurrents that make us feel that the government is not sincere — because they are doing major restructuring even before handing over the system to the legitimate democratic assembly that this agreement came to,” he said.Wangchuk said the government was making what he described as irreversible structural changes in Ladakh concerning land, industries, tourism and local governance before the proposed democratic assembly was established.Story continues below this adHe said Ladakh’s fragile ecology needed protection from rapid commercialisation and argued that local people should have a greater say in decisions affecting the region.Also Read | The evolution of state protections under Article 371, and what 371K could mean for Ladakh“Ladakh happens to be in this very fragile ecological zone. If locals do not have any say in how the region is managed, then it will be ruled and run by people who have a lot of vested interests. Soon it will be commercialised, corporatised and industrialised without any consideration for the ecology.“Therefore, we believe that the local people should have participation in making such decisions that will not only affect the people here but actually the whole of North India — because much of the water for the two billion population of India, and on the other side other countries, goes from the Himalayas. So people in the Himalayas should have a say, which is what the Sixth Schedule guarantees, and 371 can also do the same,” he said.Wangchuk also criticised the Centre’s decision to hold a meeting with Ladakh representatives after the proposed padyatra was announced. He alleged that the meeting was intended to delay the march and said the lack of substantive progress had deepened distrust.Story continues below this adCalling it “cheap tricks of Delhi”, Wangchuk said, “Our padyatra initially was to leave Kargil on 10 September. But the Delhi meeting was called. It now looks like it was called just to stall the march. The only “outcome” of that meeting was another meeting — in October — mind you when the martyrs’ month will also pass. So they are just ‘Cheap tricks’ and have disappointed us and distrust has multiplied only.”The Centre has argued that granting statehood to Ladakh could have implications for India’s strategic interests in the border region. Wangchuk rejected the argument, citing Arunachal Pradesh as an example of a strategically sensitive border state that was granted full statehood.“A case in point is Arunachal Pradesh. Arunachal Pradesh was a UT without legislature earlier. They were given UT with legislature and full statehood for the exact same argument. If you go back to 1986, I think, when Arunachal was made into a full statehood, the argument given was: it’s a strategic border region and we must have democracy there,” Wangchuk said.“And how can the same reason be used today to say for Ladakh we must not give statehood because it is a strategic sensitive region? It doesn’t make sense. If Arunachal has been a peaceful state, then how can Ladakh go wrong? I mean we have now the case of Arunachal — 40 years of it. So it proves that their argument was right back then and it will be right again for Ladakh,” he adds.