Reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir

The draft to The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act was introduced in the Parliament on August 05, 2019. It was passed in The Rajya Sabha on the same day, and in The Lok Sabha on August 06, 2019. It comes under The Ministry of Home Affairs.

This Act was in the glare of publicity because it was preceded by a Presidential Order under Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which superseded the 1954 Presidential Order. The dissolution  of the 1954 order resulted in the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian constitution which accorded the state of Jammu and Kashmir with special provisions. The revocation of the said articles snatched from Jammu and Kashmir its special status and paved the way for the introduction of the Reorganisation Bill. This gained the attention of the media all over the world and generally garnered negative remarks from the international media.

This Act reorganises the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories, viz. the eponymous union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, and that of Ladakh. While it provisions for J&K to have a  legislative assembly, it states that Ladakh will be administered by only a Lieutenant Governor. As per this law, the new union territory of Ladakh comprises of the districts of Kargil and Leh, whereas all the remaining districts come under the jurisdiction of the UT of J&K. Of the six Lok Sabha seats assigned to the former state of J&K, 1 will be assigned to Ladakh and 5 will be accorded to the UT of J&K. The law also declared that the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir will function as the High Court for both the union territories.

This law faced severe criticism from certain sections of people in India and abroad. It was asserted that the way the said Articles were repealed was unlawful and undemocratic. Arguments were made that such an annulment of the laws ought to be dismissed for it violated Article 14 of the Constitution for non-consideration of pertinent aspects and for not assigning a hearing to the affected parties - including the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, the revocation was accompanied by heavy use of armed forces, occlusion of the telephone lines and the internet in the Kashmir Valley. A number of prominent Kashmiri statesmen and legislators were taken into detention, including the former chief ministers, Smt. Mehbooba Mufti, Shri Omar Abdullah, and Shri Farooq Abdullah, among others.  Government officials justified these constraints as planned to forestall violence. As of the time of this writing, the aforementioned leaders are still in custody, in fact, their detention has been extended for the coming 3 months.

International human rights federations reprimanded the revocation decree and the manner in which it was implemented by employing armed forces in huge numbers and cutting communication. The use of force to suppress the voice of the locals did not go down well with many. The government has maintained its stand that the situation has remained normal but the same has not been apprised by the local inhabitants as the response from the Kashmir Valley has been cunningly suppressed because of the imposed communication blackout.

On a diplomatic front, except for Pakistan, China, and their supporting countries, this matter remained a non-issue for other nations, which either stayed mum or supported India in this affair, acknowledging that this is an exclusively internal matter of hers and none has any right whatsoever to make any type of comment regarding it.

Kashmir has remained a reason for dispute for Pakistan and India, with both countries administering its fair share of land. Whereas both the countries hope to resolve this issue someday, India’s step of abrogating Articles 370 and 35A has been perceived by Pakistan as an act of aggression. It has further severed the already fractured ties between the two neighbours.

The area of Gilgit-Baltistan, a part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, functions on a self-governance model, as per which 10 districts come under its jurisdiction. The government comprises of the cabinet, selected from members of the Gilgit–Baltistan Assembly, and the non-political civil staff within each department. The province is governed by a unicameral legislature with the head of government known as the Chief Minister. The Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) has a parliamentary form of government where the President is the Constitutional Head of state and the Prime Minister, supported by a Council of Ministers, is the Chief Executive. The unicameral Azad Kashmir (PoK) Legislative Assembly elects both the President and the Prime Minister. The state has its own Supreme Court and High Court. In a similar fashion, the India administered Kashmir also had significant autonomy, had its own constitution, flag, anthem, etc. which the Indian government did not deem appropriate as it considers Kashmir (including Gilgit-Baltistan, PoK, and the part occupied by China) an indivisible part of India. 

The government took a wise step by abrogating the aforementioned Articles as a great amount of money was being poured into the former state of J&K but desired development was not happening. The situation there had been disordered and disturbed for quite a very long time. Now, the Government needs to step up and prove the naysayers wrong by presenting to the world a Kashmir that it has never seen. If the Government is not able to achieve such a feat and win over the hearts of the natives then all this practice would not go down well in the history books.

Moreover, international media, such as Al Jazeera and New York Times have been reporting contrary to what is being flaunted by the Indian media. If the version presented by the foreign media has any veracity to it, then the words such as deplorable and fraud would best describe the scenario.

It would be best to conclude by saying that the imposed communication blackouts and detention of democratically elected leaders, ex-ministers, and any persons without any pending criminal inquiry is highly condemnable and does not bode well for a democratic nation and goes against its very character.