Gitanjali Angmo, educationist and wife of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, on Saturday questioned restrictions on student protests, saying peaceful dissent was essential to democracy and governments must engage with protesters rather than shut down dialogue. She also said Sanatan could not be equated with the BJP and that Ladakh’s fight was for its people’s right to determine their future through elected representatives.Speaking at the Khushwant Singh Lit Fest, in conversation with senior journalist Sunetra Chaudhuri, Angmo criticised curbs on demonstrations at Jantar Mantar and the requirement that protesters use designated venues, warning that suppressing dissent without addressing grievances could aggravate tensions.“In a democracy, dialogue is the valve which helps release the pressure,” she said, likening discontent to a pressure cooker. “The fact that so many in different corners are protesting is a failure of the system to engage in dialogue and constructive ways of solving problems,” she said, adding that people did not sit through protests unless they felt they had no other option.Citing Manipur, Mizoram, Ladakh and the farmers’ agitation, she said governments could not remain unaccountable indefinitely. “History is ruthless,” she said, arguing that narratives built by those in power could not permanently suppress the truth.‘Sanatan is not the BJP’Describing herself as a practising Hindu who studied and taught the Vedas, Vedanta and the Bhagavad Gita, Angmo said Sanatan, which represents eternal truth, was being appropriated and politicised.“BJP is not Hinduism. BJP is not Sanatan, because you have to follow Satya,” she said.The search for truth was universal, she argued, and found in Sikhism, Buddhism and other traditions too. India’s heritage embraced thought from materialism to Vedanta, and disagreement had enriched it. Political use of religious identity had obscured traditions of tolerance and plurality, she said; India could offer the world unity without uniformity.Story continues below this adShe remained hopeful about the younger generation, having seen people from different backgrounds unite for causes larger than themselves. “Humanity is enough. And working towards divinity is enough,” she said.‘Ladakh needs its own voice’Ladakh’s demand for political representation dates back to Independence, Angmo said. The revocation of Article 370 in 2019 raised hopes of a greater say, including safeguards for its tribal population, land and resources, but these, she alleged, remained unfulfilled.Ladakh is still governed without an elected legislature, with key decisions resting with the Lieutenant Governor and the administration, she said, alleging that frequently changing administrators lacked understanding of the region. “They try to cut, copy and paste solutions of Delhi and other places, which by themselves are a cut, copy and paste of London or the US, and they don’t work,” she said.She warned that policies framed without consultation, including large solar parks and mining, could damage the fragile ecosystem and appropriate land without benefits for locals. “What we want is that decisions are not to be taken by a Governor, an LG or a commissioner, but by the elected representatives,” she said, adding that the government had agreed to this in a memorandum of understanding signed in May but gone back on its word.Story continues below this ad‘Opposed to mindless development, falsehood’Asked whom she and Wangchuk were fighting, she said they opposed falsehood, mindless development, exploitation of the Himalayas and governance that did not serve Ladakh and the country.Angmo alleged the government withdrew Wangchuk’s detention order because it was difficult to defend in court. “It was not because they suddenly had grace and kindness overflowing from their hearts,” she said.She criticised the circulation of what she called inaccurate allegations, saying an affidavit had to be corrected after details were leaked to the media. “This is not statesmanship,” she said, adding that the couple had challenged Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah to debate the allegations publicly.Wangchuk ended his hunger strike, she said, because he did not want young protesters to lose their lives after the September 24, 2025 violence in Ladakh, in which four people were killed, and feared a wider crackdown. “He did not want to become a Mahatma at the cost of youngsters for whom he was fighting,” she said.Story continues below this adShe alleged hospital access was restricted while Wangchuk was admitted and that officials visited to persuade him to end the fast. Written assurances were given, she said, though some issues remained unresolved.His participation had overcome people’s fear, she said, but the movement now had its own momentum and needed sustained engagement with educators, experts, policymakers and bureaucrats.Rejecting the suggestion that she was speaking on her husband’s behalf, she said, “I am not here substituting for him or representing him. I am not his battery backup, but we are two power stations in our own right. And occasionally, we link up to the same grid.”Wangchuk was in Delhi for talks with the Union Home Ministry, she added.