Date: 6 August, 2019
Press Release
In a single stroke of decisions, the Indian government has revoked Articles 370 and 35A, bifurcated Jammu and Kashmir into J&K and Ladakh, and reduced their status to Union Territories. While there are questions about the legal soundness of these decisions, their moral illegitimacy lies in the fact that none of the stakeholders in J&K have been consulted – native people of J&K (both current residents and those who have migrated out in the past decades), their local community leaders and political leaders belonging to either moderate or non-moderate ends of the ideological spectrum. Absolutely no one belonging to J&K was consulted or taken in confidence about the government’s decision. Revoking Articles 370 and 35A is going back on the promise as part of which state of J&K decided to become part of India in an agreement between J&K ruler Hari Singh and Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.
Mainstream and moderate political leaders have been put under house arrest, all means of communication cut, curfew imposed and massive army troops deployed in the J&K region, since a few days before the government’s announcement of the decision in the parliament in Delhi. This means that communication among even the normal peace-loving people and their leaders is severely restricted, their mobility constrained, and no news is coming out of the region.
One must ask how would the people have taken a decision in any other part of the country if their statehood was converted into an union territory status or the earlier use of pellet guns causing grievous harm to ordinary people including children and women? It clearly shows the discriminatory attitude of Indian state towards people of J&K, primarily on religious basis, and at the same time demonstrates tremendous restraint people of J&K have shown in the face of adverse situations. Because of a sustained right wing propaganda even the Indian people have come to believe the majoritarian mindset that J&K unfairly enjoys some special status. A separate Constitution for J&K may sound obnoxious but the fact is, it is the Constitution of J&K which says that J&K is integral part of India, not the Indian Constitution. And what privileges can people enjoy under a long term military like rule?
There are other instances from around the country where people have asserted their autonomy. Nagaland wants separate Constitution and flag. It believes in the idea of co-existence with India without subjecting itself to Indian Constitution. Siddaramaiah’s Karnataka government decided to have its own flag, the second state in the country after J&K to do so. Rabri Devi and Mamta Banerjee, as Chief Ministers, decide not to subject themselves to the PM of the day and violated the protocols. Tamil Nadu doesn’t agree to the three language formula of national education policy because of its opposition to imposition of Hindi. The Article 243G of the Constitution envisions self-rule at the Village Panchayat level. The idea of autonomy is at the core of democracy. Rather than opposing the special status of J&K other states should have demanded a similar status for deepening of democracy. Then there are sovereign individuals within the country, like the infamous Unnao MLA from UP, Kuldeep Singh Sengar, presently in news for wrong reasons, who refuse to be subjected themselves to the rule of law and the governments usually go along with them. His accomplices have openly fired at senior police officials of the Unnao district on more occasions than one. But that is pardonable because he has chosen to be with the party in power. We don’t feel threatened by him but are quite alarmed to see the picture of a child or woman pelting stones at security forces in Kashmir. Is the bias religiously coloured?
The government must withdraw the Presidential order and State reorganisation Bill, call for assembly elections at the earliest to restore a semblance of democracy in J&K and let the new assembly take up its proposals. The armed forces should be withdrawn from internal areas of J&K so that situation can return to normalcy and people can enjoy civil liberties as in other parts of the country. Centralisation of political power has not helped the situation anywhere and government must give up any attempt in that direction. The only manner in which J&K can remain with India is when full democracy will be restored there.
Pannalal Surana (National President), Advocate Mohammad Shoaib (Uttar Pradesh), Sandeep Pandey (National Vice President), Shyam Gambhir (National General Secretary), Niraj Kumar (National President, Socialist Yuvjan sabha), Lubna Sarwath (Telangana)
