news details |
|
|
| NC must abandon its greater autonomy plank | | |
BY RUSTAM
JAMMU, JAN 9: Rejecting the demand of National Conference (NC) President Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah for special status for Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) in 1949, the Chairman of the Indian Constitution Drafting Committee, Dr B R Ambedkar, told the Sheikh that “you want India and Indians to defend Kashmir. You want Kashmir and Kashmiris to exercise all rights all over India. But you do not want India and Indians to exercise similar rights in J&K. I am Law Minister of India and I cannot be a party to an act of betrayal of national interest”. The then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had asked the Sheikh to meet Dr Ambedkar and convince him as far as his demand for the special status for the State (on the ground of religion) was concerned.
However, the Sheikh’s demand was ultimately accepted and Article 306-A (read 370) was incorporated in the Indian Constitution in October 1949, though as a purely temporary measure. The Indian Constituent Assembly adopted the Draft Article 306-A overlooking the unequivocal warning of a Muslim member of the Constituent Assembly, Maulalan Hasrat Mohani, that “grant of special status to Kashmir” on the score of religion “would enable it to assume independence”.
Both Dr Ambedkar and Hasrat Mohani were right. That they were right could be seen from the loud claimers in Kashmir for independence, semi-independence and merger with Pakistan. The demand of the NC for autonomy and the demand for self-rule as advocated by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) are two sides of one and the same coin and these demands, if accepted and implemented would at once mean quasi-independence for the State – just a step short of complete independence from India.
The acceptance and implementation of the self-rule formulation would also mean the empowerment of Pakistan to the point that it shall exercise co-equal and sovereign powers with India in J&K, thus negating the supreme sacrifices made by the Indian nation and the Indian Army. In other words, the acceptance and implementation of the self-rule formulation would automatically mean India-Pakistan joint-control over J&K, withdrawal of Indian Army from the State, porous Actual Line of Control, dual currency, economic independence and slavery of Jammu and Ladakh. The PDP says that under the self-rule regime, the office of the elected Sadar-e-Riyasat, who would be a mere puppet in the hands of the ruling elite, would rotate between Kashmir and Jammu. This is just a ploy devised cunningly to mislead and hoodwink the people of Jammu province.
Similarly, the acceptance of the autonomy demand would also at once mean the negation of the work done by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to bring J&K under the ambit of hundreds of the Central laws and several Central institutions, including the institutions Auditor and Comptroller General, Election Commission and Supreme Court of India. Besides, such a drastic change would mean the withdrawal of the offices of Governor and Chief Minister and revival of the offices archaic offices of Sadar-e-Riyasat and Wazir-e-Azam and the restoration of a system under which the Sadar-e-Riyasat and Judges of the High Court shall hold their office so long as they enjoy the confidence of the J&K Legislature, in effect, of the ruling elite. That means the State would have committed Sadar-e-Riyasat and committed judiciary and a gagged press.
In addition, the acceptance of the autonomy demand would mean the replacement of parliamentary form of government with a local oligarch, under which the people would have no power and no fundamental rights and under which the ruling elite shall exercise absolute and unbridled legislative, judicial and executive powers. New Delhi would have jurisdiction just over three subjects – defence, foreign affairs and communication – and New Delhi shall have no power whatsoever to intervene even if there is a breakdown of constitutional machinery.
The NC and the PDP must give up their divisive and anti-democratic and anti-people demands. For, an overwhelming majority of the people of J&K are opposed to both these concepts, saying these are not only anti-national formulations, but ale also anti-all non-Kashmiri Muslim minorities and other social and ethnic groups, including displaced Kashmiri Hindus, Gujjar and Bakerwal Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and refugees from West Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir.
The prevailing resentment in Jammu and Ladakh and the indifferent attitude in Kashmir to the recommendations made by Justice Sageer Ahmed concerning the Centre-State relations all serve to clinch the whole issue and establish that a vast majority of the people, barring a handful supporters of the NC, the PDP and similar other Valley-based separatist organizations, want a system that integrates them fully into India and also empowers them so that they are able to determine their political future under the democratic and liberal Indian political system.
It is ironical that the Congress, the inheritor of the legacy of late Indira Gandhi, is not putting its foot down and opposing what the NC and the PDP are demanding. The Congress must rise to the occasion and make common cause with those opposing the Justice Sageer Ahmed report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
