news details |
|
|
| Excessive, preponderant representation to one community | | J&K Council of Ministers | | Rustam
Jammu, Jan 17: The manner in which representation was given to the various communities in the just-expanded and reshuffled Council of Ministers has created widespread resentment. The Sikh community has protested against the NC-Congress leadership saying it deserved some representation in the Council of Ministers, but was denied representation. The internally-displaced Kashmiri Hindus have also registered their protest against the coalition saying the hounded out and persecuted community deserved some share in the Council of Ministers which discusses and decides important issues and takes policy decisions.
The excluded communities, which constitute almost 6 per cent of the State's population, do make a point when they bemoan their non-inclusion in the Council of Ministers for the second time in a row during the NC-Congress regime. As minorities and miniscule minorities, these communities did deserve representation in the Council of Ministers.
Actually, the NC-Congress coalition has not only denied representation to the Sikhs and the internally-displaced Kashmiri Hindus, but it has given excessive and preponderant share of representation to one particular community, nay the members of a particular religious sect, and virtually denied representation to all other communities and various religious sects. This is not an exaggeration. This is statement of fact.
That this is a state of fact could be seen from the fact that out of a total of 25 Ministers, including the Chief Minister and seven Ministers of State, the number of Ministers representing the non-Muslim minorities is just 6, five in the Cabinet and one Minister of State. This, notwithstanding the fact that the non-Muslim minorities, including Jammu Dogras, Ladakhi Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and many others, constitute almost 40 per cent of the State's population. Before the reconstitution of Council of Ministers, the number of Ministers belonging to the non-Muslim minorities was 7. The only religious and ethnic minority group which got representation in excess of their numerical strength was the Gujjar and Bakerwal community. Three Ministers belonging to this ethnic group, two of Cabinet rank and one holding independent charge, had been inducted in the Council of Ministers in 2009 and they were retained during the just-reconstituted Council of Ministers.
The truth is that the members of a particular sect, who do not constitute more than 40 per cent of the State's population, have got excessive and preponderant share of representation. Their number in the Council of Ministers is not less than 18 (75 per cent). Was the exclusion of other minorities from the Council of Ministers a mere lapse or did the ruling coalition did it deliberately? It is for the ruling coalition to explain the circumstances under which it gave excessive representation to the members of a particular sect and excluded others. But it has to recognize that it has not applied the principle of protection of minorities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
