Panjim, Goa: The Delhi government’s decision to drop a representative from conservation organisation Wildlife SOS from its newly constituted State Board for Wildlife (SBWL) has raised questions about the process through which governments select board members for statutory bodies tasked with wildlife conservation.The decision followed objections from Bhopal based wildlife activist Ajay Dubey, who in a social media post on X questioned the NGO’s appointment amid an ongoing investigation into an alleged leopard poaching case linked to Kuno National Park in Madhya Pradesh. Wildlife SOS chief executive and co-founder Kartick Satyanarayan was also questioned by investigators in connection with the case.Gaps in appointment processIn his complaint to the Union environment ministry and Delhi government authorities on November 2, Dubey demanded the dissolution and reconstitution of the newly formed board, a formal inquiry into the credentials and backgrounds of its non-official members, and clear rules for their selection and vetting.The complaint accessed by The Wire said, “The nomination process suffers from a fundamental procedural and legal void due to the absence of clear execution rules and defined procedures governing the selection, vetting, tenure, and removal of non-official members of the SBWL in Delhi. Without transparent rules and objective qualification criteria, nominations remain subject to arbitrary selections, allowing controversial entities to gain statutory appointments.” Speaking to The Wire, Dubey said, “The inclusion of any NGO facing severe legal scrutiny or ongoing criminal investigations – such as allegations under the Wildlife Protection Act – on a state statutory body highlights a systemic lapse in due diligence and background vetting.”Also read: Gaps in India’s Lab Animal Draft Rules Could Undermine Decades of Scientific Progress“State wildlife boards are entrusted with high-level conservation policy and ecological oversight; appointing entities without thorough integrity checks severely undermines public trust and risks compromising the independent governance of Delhi’s wildlife protection,” he added. How did the government miss the August poaching cases?According to a report by Hindustan Times on Monday (November 2), Delhi environment and forest minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa said the government had decided to remove the organisation from the board and end its association with the Delhi Forest Department. A formal order is yet to follow.Explaining the decision, Sirsa said, “The proposal to include it as a member of the SBWL was moved in February 2026, and the final proposal went to the Competent Authority for approval in July 2026. It has now come to our knowledge that some cases were made in August 2026 in MP relating to the NGO’s alleged involvement in a wildlife crime. In light of this, Wildlife SOS will be dropped from the Board proposal, and its association with the Delhi forest department ends from today itself.”This distinction is significant. The appointment proposal was reportedly made before the cases were registered against Wildlife SOS. However, the board was formally constituted only in October, raising questions of whether the government carried out any further checks before finalising its members.An appointment under scrutinyAccording to a report by The Hindu, “The 30-member board, headed by the Delhi chief minister as its chairperson, was notified on October 23, according to a gazette notification. It is a statutory body required to be set up by states and Union territories under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, to advise on and oversee wildlife-related activities.”The board has the environment and forest minister as its vice-chairperson, two MLAs – Umang Bajaj (Rajender Nagar) and Gajender Singh Yadav (Mehrauli) – and ten nominated experts as members. Three representatives from wildlife NGOs were also proposed: Wildlife Trust of India, WWF-India and Wildlife SOS.Also read: ‘Permanently End Wild Animal Imports,’ 27 International Organisations Urge VantaraWildlife SOS’s appointment came under scrutiny after investigators seized ten leopard pelts on the Gwalior-Agra highway on July 23. The two men arrested in connection with the seizure claimed that they were acting on the orders of Satyanarayan. The NGO has denied the allegations.According to a HT report, investigators alleged that a Wildlife SOS employee had joined a poaching network using a false identity and helped its members kill at least ten leopards. The employee allegedly claimed that he had infiltrated the network as an informer to raise funds for the organisation.According to a Times of India report, the Madhya Pradesh State Tiger Strike Force (STSF) questioned Satyanarayan for three days, until September 30.What checks are required before an appointment?Speaking to The Wire, Praveen Bhargav, a former member of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) said that both the NBWL and SBWLs are statutory committees that have to be constituted in accordance with Section 5A and Section 6 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.“On both these committees, the law mandates that the individuals nominated are eminent conservationists, ecologists and environmentalists,” Bhargav said. “…every government will consider the background of individuals and how good they look on paper. In most cases, they will very craftly try and select those with a doctorate in a respected scientific institution, preferably funded by the government, but with no track record of conservation interventions against the government,” he added. Also read: Madhya Pradesh’s Special Task Force Arrests Two In Connection With Cheetah Killing, Retrieves GunBhargav also points to another practice – nominating retired officials who have since joined large NGOs and may be more willing to accommodate the government’s priorities.However, concerns about political motives in wildlife board appointments are not just limited to Delhi. Former members and environmentalists say the selection process generally favours individuals who are less likely to challenge government priorities or obstruct projects.A former member of the Goa SBWL who wished to remain anonymous, told The Wire, “Government officials sometimes recommend individuals who they believe will make it easier for them to get development projects approved.”Similarly, Claude Alvares, director of the Goa Foundation, an environmental organisation that works to protect Goa’s natural resources, told The Wire, “Sometimes, a member who opposes a proposed project is overruled by the rest of the board. If they continue to stand their ground, they may find themselves dropped from the board the next time it is reconstituted.”According to HT, Wildlife SOS issued a statement responding to the Delhi government’s decision to remove it from the SBWL stating, “We are concerned by the recent developments and hope that decisions concerning this matter will be guided by verified facts and due process, rather than allegations that are yet to be established, particularly when preliminary investigations are still underway.”