news details |
|
|
| Abolish Article 370 to reorganize state, says Kashyap | | Conflict Resolution | |
NEHA
JAMMU, June 24: Srinagar once again on Saturday witnessed another assembly of "conflict-managers". They assembled at Delhi Public School to discuss federal structures with a view to finding a solution to the problem in Kashmir. Actually, the Institute of Peace Research and Action (IPRA), Delhi, organized a seminar at the DPS on "Innovative Federal Structures and Conflict Resolution". Former Secretary General of Lok Sabha and expert on parliamentary affairs, Dr Subhash C Kashyap, delivered keynote address. Some of the participants and speakers included Prof Susheela Bhan, Prof Partha S Ghosh, Professor of South Asian Studies, School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and M P Singh, a social scientist. A number of Kashmiri fanatics and supporters of Kashmiri separatists, of Jammu University, were also there. There is no need to make a reference here to what these Kashmiri fanatics and their supporters said during the seminar, as their views are too well-known. Suffice it to say that they, like
Partha Ghose, underlined the need to strengthen Article 370 (read withdrawal of all the central laws and institutions from the state which were extended to it after October 1949). The implications of what they said were dangerous and unsettling.
However, it would be highly desirable to reflect on what Dr Subhash C Kashyap said while delivering his keynote address. His keynote address, among other things, said: "The Constitution of India is the most potent conflict resolution mechanism to have been founded on the spirit of accommodation, adjustment and respect for ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity. Conflicts like Punjab, Tamil Nadu and North-East were sought to be resolved under the Constitution at every point of time. The creation of new states from 14 to 28 took place owing to ethnic and linguistic demands in the Union. Inter-state councils dealing with financial, educational and political matters in every state of India have been formed as soft ways of conflict resolution. Article 370 should be abolished in J&K in a bid to reorganize states for a multi-tier federal structure. A revision of union-state should be carried out to assure that sovereignty is vesting in people at the grassroots level. And Panchayats have to be gifted with power so that a top-down model becomes down-up."
It was clear from what Kashyap said that he not only vouched for a solution of the problems being faced by the people of Jammu & Kashmir within the Constitution of India, but also underlined the need to remove from the Indian statute book Article 370. In other words, he emphasized the need for a solution that not only bridges the politico-constitutional gulf between Jammu & Kashmir and New Delhi by abrogating Article 370, but also the need for the state's reorganization. "Article 370 should be abolished in J&K in a bid to reorganize states for a multi-tier federal structure" and "a revision of union-state should be carried out to assure that sovereignty is vesting in people at the grassroots level" was one of the most significant upshots of his whole argument. Equally significant was his observation that "the creation of new states from 14 to 28 took place owing to ethnic and linguistic demands in the Union" and that "inter-state councils dealing with financial, educational and political matters in every state of India have been formed as soft ways of conflict resolution".
It is not really very clear whether Kashyap directly suggested the division of the state to set up three full-fledged states of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, but his observations on the creation of new states and Article 370 do suggest that he in his heart of hearts appreciate the idea of the state's reorganization believing that such a reorganization has the potential of meeting the urges of the people of the state. He talked of a model that would not discriminate between region and region and between community and community and that would empower the people at the grass-roots level. There was nothing whatever in his keynote address which could even remotely suggest that he, like other so-called conflict-managers, vouch for a special status for Jammu & Kashmir, notwithstanding the fact that he did recognize the importance of ethnicity and language. His keynote address was very clear in this regard. He talked of participatory democracy and opposed concentration of power in the hands of a selected few.
The Government of India would do well to go by the sane counsel of Kashyap and abolish Article 370 so that New Delhi is able to reorganize the state and empower the people at the grassroots level. The best course would be to divide the state into Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh states because the needs and compulsions of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh are different, as also because the contradictions in the political perceptions of Jammu and Kashmir and between the latter and Ladakh are irreconcilable. Abolition of Article 370, coupled with reorganization of Jammu & Kashmir, will help New Delhi surmount the problems it has been facing in this part of the country since 1947. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
