news details |
|
|
| Nipping in bud a dangerous idea | | |
Hari Om
The Kashmir-based National Conference (NC), which suffered massive defeats in the 2014 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections and in the just-held elections to the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Leh, on November 9 adopted a resolution that opposed the demand in the shabbily-treated Jammu and Ladakh for separation from Kashmir and sought pre-1953 politico-constitutional status for Jammu and Kashmir State.
"Autonomy forms the bedrock of the party's political agenda and it will continue to struggle for this goal in the future with vigour and sincerity of purpose," the resolution No. two, inter-alia, said.
The National Conference, in addition, termed the demand in Jammu and Ladakh for trifurcation as "divisive" and asked New Delhi to engage with Pakistan and Hurriyat leadership in the Valley to address what it called "the external dimension" of the so-called Kashmir issue. It didn't say a word against those who bloody and convulse the State's political scene on a daily basis and leave no stone unturned to further disturb the already rather disturbed socio-religious and political equilibrium in the communally sensitive State. What the National Conference said in its nasty resolution was self-explanatory. It clearly suggested what it stands for.
Will a return to the "pre-1953 situation" in Kashmir redress the grievances of the Kashmiri Muslims and the people of Jammu and Ladakh, whose watchword and battle-cry was, and continues to be, the State's complete merger with India and application of the Indian Constitution, barring Article 370 and Article 35-A, to the State in full? Will it recognise their right to shape their political and economic future themselves in a meaningful manner? A study of the political, constitutional and administrative structure as it existed in Jammu and Kashmir prior to Sheikh Abdullah's dismissal and arrest on August 9, 1953 suggests that it will not. On the contrary, it suggests that all the powers, legislative, executive and judicial would be conferred on the "Council of Ministers" depriving the people, including Kashmiri Muslims, of whatever political rights they have exercises so far.
Between September 7, 1939 and January 26, 1957, the Jammu and Kashmir constitution was ostensibly used by the State ruler, Hari Singh, to placate the Kashmiris. Under the leadership of Sheikh Abdullah, they were demanding since 1931 the replacement of autocracy by democracy. Though a Legislative Assembly of 75 elected and nominated members was set up in accordance with the Jammu and Kashmir Constitutional Act of 1939, Sheikh Abdullah and his colleagues continued their protest.
Act of 1939
The pro-democratic leaders felt that the Act of 1939 obstructed the formation of responsible government and facilitated the exploitation of the people. The Act was also condemned because it was not framed by a Constituent Assembly elected on adult franshise, but by the ruler and his "henchmen". Without any elected Assembly, the Act recognised the ruler as the "fountain head of all essential attributes of sovereignty" with no court, person or body having the right to overrule his measures or question their constitutional validity. The Act did not also recognise the "doctrine of supremacy of the legislature" nor did it provide for an independent judiciary or grant freedom to press. The institution of "communal electorates" was also introduced by the Act.
When, despite their efforts, modern democratic principles were not introduced in the State's polity, Sheikh Abdullah and other pro-democracy leaders intensified their struggle to seek the withdrawal of the Act. This struggle ultimately developed into the "1946 Quit Kashmir movement", with the National Conference cadres challenging the ruler's authority, confronting the police, attacking police stations and other symbols of the government, demanding the dethronement of Hari Singh and establishment of an elected government. To restore order, the police and the army had to swing into action and imprison Sheikh Abdullah and other pro-democracy leaders on the charge of "sedition".
Under these circumstances and in wake of the Pakistani aggression, Jammu and Kashmir acceded to the Indian dominion on October 26, 1947. Unfortunately, the state's accession and the Sheikh's appointment as its "emergency administrator" in October 1947 did not bring any relief to the people. For the Sheikh Abdullah rather than repeal the Act of 1939, chose to exploit it to strengthen his own position, marginalise his associates like Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed, Ghulam Mohammed Sadiq, Mohi-ud- din Kara and Maulana Masoodi and crush his political opponents in Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
It was only during the rule of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed (August, 1953-September, 1963) that a number of measures were adopted to set up democratic institutions. These included the abrogation on May 14, 1954 of Section 75 of the Act of 1939 under which the "council of ministers" acted as the "final interpreter of the State's Constitution". "His Highness's Board of Judicial Advisors" was also abolished on May 14, 1954, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was extended to Jammu and Kashmir and on January 26, 1957, the people's representatives in the State's Constituent Assembly adopted a new constitution recognising the people's right to shape their political, administrative and economic policy. The press was also granted full freedom.
Root of Alienation
Ignoring the implications of a return to the pre- 1953 situation in Kashmir would be suicidal. The roots of the Kashmiris' alienation lie not in the Central laws introduced in the State after August 9, 1953, but in the misrule, bureaucratic bungling and the denial of the legitimate expression of popular will. In fact, it was leaders like Farooq Abdullah of the National Conference and late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi who messed up things in Kashmir Valley by rigging wholesale the 1987 Assembly elections in the State and the nation has been paying through its nose ever since then.
What the people of Jammu and Kashmir immediately need is not the restoration of pre-1953 situation. They need complete integration into India to enjoy the fundamental rights as embodied in the Indian Constitution. A return to pre-1953 situation will not only jeopardise the legitimate rights and interests of the people of the State but would also provoke political explosions in the nationalist Jammu and Ladakh. Courtesy: Daily Pioneer
The writer is former Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Jammu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
