news details |
|
|
| Omar Abdullah partly right, partly wrong | | Article 370 | | Rustam
JAMMU, Feb 13: During his 70-minute address to the Legislative Assembly after the discussion on the motion of thanks on Governor Narender Nath Vohra's address to both the houses of the State legislature on Wednesday, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said that Jammu and Kashmir even before 1947 had the State Subject Act, which prohibited people from other states from purchasing the land in the State. "Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel or Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah should not be blamed for the State Subject Act," he said. "It was the decision of Maharaja as he feared that people from the adjoining Punjab state would come and settle in Jammu" and added that the National Conference and the Congress have been only protecting the interests of the Maharaja and the people of the State and that the controversy created by BJP and some other smaller parties from Jammu on it was a mere poll plank. "Jammu & Kashmir is a sensitive State and Article 370 acts as a bridge to connect Jammu & Kashmir with rest of the country...No one could remove Article 370 from the State," he also said.
Omar Abdullah was partly right and partly wrong. He was right when he said that Jammu & Kashmir even before 1947 had the State Subject Act, which prohibited people from other states from purchasing the land in the State. However, he did not inform the House as to what had motivated the Maharaja in 1927 to frame State Subject laws. He should have told the House that Maharaja Hari Singh framed the State Subject laws to prevent the entry of undesirable elements from the neighbouring Punjab and other places into Jammu & Kashmir who wanted to foment communal troubles in Kashmir to ensure the segregation of the Valley from the Jammu Kingdom. This is a fact which cannot be denied. The people of the State would do well to study the history of relations between the Dogra Kingdom and the communal leadership in Kashmir pre-1927. Such an exercise would help them to know the circumstances under which the Maharaja framed the State Subject laws.
The Chief Minister was absolutely wrong when he described Article 370 that has deprived the people of the state - apart from refugees from West Pakistan and minorities - of the rights which are available to their counterparts across he country - is a bridge between the State and rest of the country. Article 370 is a temporary provision and has nothing to do with the accession of the State with India. It can be removed anytime by the Indian Parliament, the supreme law-making body, by invoking Article 368 of the India Constitution. Even the President of India can amend or abrogate Article 370 using the legislative powers vested with him by Article 370 if the Union Cabinet so desires.
Omar Abdullah said that the National Conference and the Congress have been only protecting the interests of the Maharaja and the people of the State. He only misled the people of the State. The National Conference and the Congress have not been protecting the interests of the Maharaja and the people of the State. They are, infact, causing harm to the State and its people by retaining the archaic State Subject laws. Only a section of vested interests in Kashmir wants to enforce the State Subject laws because it helps them hold the State aloof from the countrymen. Its support for these laws is not justifiable when viewed in the light of the fact that full citizenship rights are available to the State Subjects across the nation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
