news details |
|
|
| Congress turns separatist, says there will be a revolt if Article 35-A abolished | | Jammu, Ladakh have no say | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, July 28: It is a major development. The Congress, which claimed day in and day out, that it was a party of an all-India character, considered J&K an integral part of India, believed in the principle of equality and held secular values in high esteem, has taken a complete U-turn. It has taken the stand on controversial and unconstitutional Article 35-A which hardcore separatist and Hurriyat chief took on Friday took, thus creating an impression that there was no difference between the "mainstream" Congress party and Hurriyat Conference.
It was former JKPCC chief and union minister Saif-ud-Din Soz who broke all the walls between the Hurriyat Conference and the Congress by repeating what the Mirwaiz on Friday said. Mirwaiz had said that the BJP-RSS were changing the demographic character of the state and that there will be a revolt in Kashmir if the Union Government opposed Article 35-A in the Supreme Court on August 6. "People of Kashmir will hit the streets and oppose tooth and nail all the machinations of those who were working against Article 35-A," Mirwaiz had said. He had also said that he was keeping a close watch on the developing situation and "we will not take things lying low".
Significantly, Saif-ud-Din Soz took almost the same line. He said there would be revolt in Jammu & Kashmir if Article 35-A was removed from the Indian Constitution. "There was a need to sensitize the people of India about dangers of annuling Article 35A. We should meet PM, Home Minister and different shades of political opinion in New Delhi to make them understand that there will be revolt in J&K if Article 35A is annulled. There are many people in India who feel for Kashmiris. The case should be fought legally as well as politically. It is a political proposition and it should be fought politically," he said.
There was hardly any fundamental difference between what he said and what the Mirwaiz said about Article 35-A. They and other Kashmiri leaders - apart from "academics", former bureaucrats, former VC of Islamic University Siddiq Wahid, to mention only a few, on Friday left none in any doubt that they were only for Kashmir and that they have no place for Jammu and Ladakh in their scheme of things. They made it clear that Kashmir and Kashmiris are the sole factor in the political situation of the state and the people of Jammu and Ladakh have no other option but to fall in line and suffer at the hands of Kashmir as before.
It is for the Jammu and Ladakh-based Congress leaders to explain if they vouch for what Saif-ud-Din Soz said. It is imperative. If they remain mum, then it shall be taken to mean that they endorsed the views of Mirwaiz and Soz.
Article 35-A empowers Jammu & Kashmir Government to define citizenship and grant or not to grant citizenship rights to an individual or a group of individuals, who were not residing in the state before May 14, 1944. It was applied on May 14, 1954 and was applied retrospectively. It is discriminatory and deprives all Indians, barring Permanent Residents of the state, of any citizenship right in Jammu & Kashmir. Refugees from Pakistan have been suffering since 1947 because of Article 35-A. The plight of children of daughter of the state married outside J&K with non-state subjects is no different. It was applied to the state without taking the Parliament on board.
In the mean time, J&K Governor NN Vohra has reportedly urged the Union Home Minister to get hearing on Article 35-A in Supreme Court deferred until a new government was in place in the state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
