Unless some one knows the text and the full implication of the Article 370 of the Constitution of India, one may not know that some of the Clauses
violate the Nationhood of India and even Human Rights.
Some features and implications.
1.Similar protections for unique status exist in tribal areas of India including those in Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Nagaland. However, it is only for the state of Jammu and Kashmir that the accession of the state to India is still a matter of dispute between India and Pakistan still on the agenda of the UN Security Council and where the Government of India vide 1974 Indira-Sheikh accord committed itself to keeping the relationship between the Union and Jammu and Kashmir State within the ambit of this article.
Why?
Because it has Muslim population or is it because Sheikh Abdullah is Nehru’s step brother?
2.In notifications issued as far back as 1927 and 1932, the state created various categories of residents – with some being called permanent residents (PRs) with special rights.
Though the law did not discriminate between female and male PRs, an administrative rule made it clear that women could remain PRs only till marriage. After that they had to seek a fresh right to remain PRs.
And if a woman married someone who wasn’t a Kashmiri PR, she automatically lost her own PR status. In 2004, the state high court, in the case of State of J&K vs Sheela Sawhney, declared that there was no provision in the existing law dealing with the status of a female PR who married a non-resident.
The provision of women losing their PR status after marrying outside the state, therefore, did not have any legal basis.
This decision was historic because it corrected an administrative anomaly and brought relief to women who married outside the state.
A People’s Democratic Party government, led by Mehbooba Mufti, passed a law to overturn the court judgment by introducing a Bill styled “Permanent Residents (Disqualification) Bill, 2004’.
This was not Mufti’s solo effort. Omar Abdullah’s party, the National Conference, backed this Bill and got it passed in the assembly. But it did not ultimately see the light of day for various reasons.
Is this not Human Rights violation?
Where are the Human Rights and Feminists like Arundhati Roy and Co on the unequal status to women?
Or are these pontifications applicable only to Hindus?
3.
- the power of Parliament to make laws for the said state shall be limited to—
- (i) those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List which, in consultation with the Government of the State, are declared by the President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of Accession governing the accession of the State to theDominion of India as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for that State; and
- (ii) such other matters in the said Lists as, with the concurrence of the Government of the State, the President may by order specify.
Explanation: For the purpose of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognized by the President on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly of the State as the Sadr-i-Riyasat (now Governor) of Jammu and Kashmir, acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers of the State for the time being in office.[1][a]
- (c) the provisions of article 1 and of this article shall apply in relation to that State;
- (d) such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify:
- Provided that no such order which relates to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph (i) of sub-clause (b) shall be issued except in consultation with the Government of the State:
- Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred to in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of that Government.
(2) If the concurrence of the Government of the State referred to in paragraph (ii) of sub-clause (b) of clause (1) or in the second proviso to sub-clause (d) of that clause be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing the Constitution of the State is convened, it shall be placed before such Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.
(3) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify:
Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.[2]
In Concurrent List, the decision of the Center will be final as for as the other States are concerned.
In Kashmir it is the reverse.
In Kashmir in India or India in Kashmir?
‘Between 40 to 45% of the Non Plan Expenditure [allocations outside the Plan to run the day to day expenses] are met by the Central Government. In case of ‘self-rule’, nobody has made clear who will pay the bill.
Claude: Kashmir is today the most subsidized State in India!
Jagmohan: The poorest State in India is Bihar, but today Kashmir gets 11 times more Central assistance than Bihar. If ‘self-rule’ means self-sufficiency, all this support from the Central government will stop. But the problem is that nobody, none of the Kashmiris leaders will tell you this. If you ask them, they will say, “the finances will come”, but they will remain vague. That is for development.
Then Non Plan Expenditure, the day to day expenses like the salaries [of the government employees]. If tomorrow Kashmir is ‘de-linked’ from India except for External Affairs, Communications and Defence, the finances will not be provided anymore.
The next question is “who will pay?”
Will the Americans do it? Nobody is able to answer these questions. Some say, India should continue to finance ‘self-ruled’ Kashmir, but if tomorrow the ‘self-ruled’ government declare themselves independent or an Islamic State, will India, a secular State continue to finance a theocratic State?
There are so many contradictions in these proposals; it is what people do not understand. There are so many loopholes.
So far is Pakistan concerned, it is not even a democracy [and they are speaking of ‘self-rule’].
Claude: Does ‘self-rule’ applies also to Baltistan, Gilgit and other parts of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan?
Jagmohan: [Musharraf] has not clarified this. Today, [these areas] are virtually a colony of Pakistan. In POK, the President of Pakistan is the Chairman of the Security Council, of the Development Council and of the Kashmir Council. The Minister for Kashmir Affairs in Islamabad is the Vice-Chairman of these Councils. It means that all decisions are taken by Islamabad. It is not like here in India where the elected Chief Minister can take its own decision, there is not such thing in PoK. [The problem is that] nobody has gone into the nitty-gritty of these proposals.
Citation wiki.
Related articles
