Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 6: The BJP is in self-destruct mode. It is committing a serious mistake after mistake, notwithstanding the fact that things in the country have dramaticallt changed and that it may suffer electoral reverses in the states which brought it to power at the centre in 2014. That the popularity graph of the BJP is decline became clear from the humiliating defeats it suffered in the by-elections to the Lok Sabha seats in states like Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Only last month, the BJP lost its face in UP and Bihar and suffered humiliating defeats at the hands of Samajwadi Party in UP and RJD in Bihar.
Clearly, the BJP has not learned any lesson from its defeats and that it is pursuing a line which would hurt it the most and help its arch-political foes stage a comeback. That it is alienating its core constituency across the nation in general and Jammu and Ladakh in particular became more than evident on Tuesday, when Article 370 came up for hearing in the Supreme Court and when the apex court said that Article 370 of the Constitution, conferring separate status on J&K on religious grounds and limiting New Delhi's power to make laws for the state, had "acquired permanent status through years of existence, making its abrogation impossible".
The controversial observation came from a bench of Justices Adarsh K Goel and R F Nariman on a petition by Kumari Vijayalakshmi Jha, who had sought a declaration that "Article 370 was a temporary provision that lapsed with the dissolution of the J&K Constituent Assembly on January 26, 1957". She had also sought a declaration that the "constitution of J&K was void, inoperative and in breach of the Constitution".
Justice Nariman had drew additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta's attention to the SC's 2017 judgment in State Bank of India vs Santosh Gupta case and said the "controversy over Article 370 was settled by the court ruling the provision had acquired permanent space in the Constitution and it could no longer be abrogated".
Paradoxically, the SC also said "since the Constituent Assembly of the state ceased to exist, the President would not be able to fulfil the mandatory provision of getting its recommendation for its abrogation". This observation has baffled many, as the constituent assembly is never a permanent institution and as it ceases to exist the day the constitution so-framed and adopted by it is enforced.
What exposed the duplicity of the BJP was the fact that the Government of J&K (of which the BJP was a part" was represented by two senior lawyers, Rajeev Dhawan and Additional Advocate General M Shoeb Alam. Both defended Article 370 to the hilt. On the other hand, the Union Government, which is headed by the BJP, was represented by Additional Solicitor General Tushr Mehta. He, it appears, went to the SC unprepared and it became clear when he told the apex court that the "Centre would study the implication of the 2017 judgment, which was on the applicability of Sarfaesi Act (bank securitisation law) to J&K and come back to the court with its view", plea which was accepted giving the Union Government three weeks' time.
That Mehta went to the SC unprepared was just surprising. But what shocked and surprised the core constituency across the nation was the BJP's duplicity: the PDP-BJP government in J&K defending Article 370 and the BJP-led NDA Government at the Centre not really opposing Article 370. No wonder then that Kashmiri leaders of all hues welcomed the SC's observation and the BJP's politically conscious constituency tearing into the BJP for its no opposition for all practical purposes. |
