news details |
|
|
| Need to debate self rule, autonomy | | |
The Peoples Democratic Party’s patron and former Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed has exhorted upon his party workers to launch a public awareness campaign on the self rule proposal which he claimed holds key to peace in the entire South Asian region. Mufti’s claims can not be brushed aside without debate. Like Mufti’s party’s proposal there has been another model on vogue for last more than five decades –the greater autonomy plank of the National Conference. A part of it is in place and more is being demanded. In fact, the political elite of Jammu and Kashmir have been vying with New Delhi for more powers under the definitions of autonomy and self rule. Though this has been a dominant slogan for years now but little is known to the general masses whether the special status has done good or bad to the people and their development. The special status of Jammu and Kashmir is essentially a political boon for this sensitive state but a bane too. What is good or bad in India does not directly percolate to Jammu and Kashmir unless desired by the local political establishment. The experience, however, suggests that the bad laws found a convenient entry into Jammu and Kashmir with active facilitation by the local regimes but the good ones could not reach people as special status turned out to be a roadblock. A case in point among the bad laws is the Armed Forces Special Power Act, the PSA, the POTA etc and one among the good laws is Constitution of India amendment Act strengthening the institutions of local self governance. A couple of years back the central government, in a landmark move, decided to set up village courts all over the country to bring justice to the doorstep of villagers in a less expensive and speedier manner. But the benefits of this decision could not reach to the people of Jammu and Kashmir as its special status blocks the entry of this good law. The UPA government in its previous term which ended early this year brought a legislation called Gram Nyayalayas Bill, 2007, to establish village level courts. The bill was based on the proposals of the 114th report of the Law Commission of India and seeks to establish a village court for every panchayat at intermediate level or a group of contiguous panchayats throughout the country except Jammu and Kashmir. The gram nyayalaya or village courts is presided over by a 'nyayadhikari' who is qualified to be eligible to be a first class judicial magistrate and is be appointed by the state government in consultation with the concerned high court. The village courts follow the summary procedure in criminal cases and a simple procedure of natural justice in civil cases. Explaining the objective of the bill, the then Law Minister recalled how India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had visualised bringing justice to the doorstep of the poorest man in the village. It is meant to provide a system of justice which is less expensive, free from protracted procedural wrangles, quick and available at the grass-roots level to the common man to render justice to him as enshrined in Article 39A of the constitution. The institution of gram nyayalaya is one among scores of privileges people in other states enjoy but Jammu and Kashmir is deprived of simply for the special status. There is a need to debate the goods and bads of all special status proposals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
