 |
Riaz Masroor BBC Srinagar. |
The situation in Kashmir is not the same as it is being shown to the world. Hundreds of Kashmiri youth are imprisoned thousands of miles away from their homes in jails in Bareilly, Agra, Jodhpur, Delhi, Allahabad, and other cities. Criticizing the government is part of democracy, but speaking out here gets you jailed. Well, the tourists are coming, the law and order situation is better, and if everything is fine, then restore the democratic rights of the people.
It is to say that the Member of Parliament of Indian-administered Kashmir, Justice (Rtd) Hasnain Masoudi. He says that Jammu and Kashmir is the only region in the whole of India where for five years only a lieutenant governor and a few bureaucrats have been running the administration under the direct supervision of the Indian Home Minister.
"People are scared, silent, we can't call it normality." If there is normality, then why are elections not being held? These people (BJP) thought that they would get a referendum in their favor by holding local and village-level council elections here, but Kashmiri parties won the majority in these elections, what could be greater proof than that? Kashmiris want the restoration of Article 370.
Justice (retd) Masoudi is among the petitioners challenging the abrogation of Article 370 in the Indian Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court of India will begin hearing daily on August 2, today, about two dozen petitions seeking to set aside the Indian government's August 5, 2019 decision on special status for Kashmir. be declared 'legal' and 'unconstitutional' and the special status of Kashmir i.e. Article 370 should be restored.
The most encouraging aspect of the case before the five-judge constitution bench of the Indian Supreme Court is that during the last hearing, the apex court had excluded from discussion the Modi government's affidavit which According to the abrogation of Article 370, terrorism has ended in Kashmir and the era of peace and development has begun.
The petitioners argue that there was no people's government in Jammu and Kashmir when the decision to abrogate Article 370 was taken. It should be noted that in 2018, the BJP withdrew support from the Mehbooba Mufti-led government and imposed President's rule in Jammu and Kashmir.
In these constitutional petitions filed in the Supreme Court by three elected members of the Parliament of Kashmir, former officers of the Indian Army and Indian Air Force, and social volunteers, the question has been raised whether the Parliament had the authority to take such a decision unilaterally without the will of the Kashmiris. no?
The Indian Supreme Court has already made it clear that the matter cannot be referred to a larger bench, so all eyes are now on the hearing starting today.
How was Article 370 incorporated in the Indian Constitution and why was it abolished?
At the time of the partition of British India in August 1947, Jammu and Kashmir was ruled by Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh, who had reservations about annexation to India. However, when war broke out on the borders of Kashmir between Pakistan and India and two-thirds of Kashmir was occupied by Pakistan, the Maharaja not only sought help from the Indian Army but also announced his accession to India on three conditions.
After accession, Jammu and Kashmir's currency, defense, and communications will be under Indian control, while local legislation, taxation, and all other matters will be controlled by Kashmiris. The civil ruler of Jammu and Kashmir was called 'Prime Minister' while the Governor was called 'President of the State'.
But in 1953, the first 'Prime Minister' of Kashmir, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, was deposed and sent to jail by the then-Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and made Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad, a supporter of Delhi, the ruler of Kashmir. Kashmir was in turmoil and the midst of this, Article 370 was added to the Indian Constitution by a Presidential Order on the recommendation of Jawaharlal Nehru.
Under this article, Jammu and Kashmir will have their separate constitution, the tax system will be separate, jobs here will be reserved only for permanent residents, and no resident of any region of India could get a job here. He could neither buy land nor vote. Although, like other Indian states, Jammu and Kashmir now had a regular governor and chief minister, there was a kind of semi-autonomy, which the extremist nationalist party BJP had decided to remove decades ago.
In 2014, when BJP central leader Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister of the country, the BJP leaders announced that by abolishing Article 370, the 'Kashmir issue will be solved forever.' Just two months later, the Home Minister introduced a bill titled 'Jammu-Kashmir Reorganization' in Parliament, which was passed by a majority.
According to this bill, the region of Ladakh was separated from Jammu and Kashmir and it was made a union territory without an assembly, while Jammu and Kashmir was made a union territory with an assembly. But two days before this announcement, a curfew was imposed in Kashmir, telephone, mobile phone, and internet facilities were suspended and all political leaders were imprisoned.
After this process continued for a few months, life was restored, but the constitution of Jammu and Kashmir was abrogated and more than 800 new federal laws came into force in Kashmir. A few years before this announcement, separatist parties had been outlawed and their leadership in jails, while Hindu nationalist leaders were also detained in government guest houses.
How did the matter reach the Supreme Court?
However, three members of parliament from Jammu and Kashmir, Justice (retd) Hasnain Masoudi, Farooq Abdullah, and Muhammad Akbar Lone challenged the decision in the Supreme Court. Later, several more petitions were filed in this regard requesting that the decision be declared unconstitutional and illegal as it did not include the opinion of Kashmiris.
A year later, when the hearing on these petitions began, the matter was transferred to a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court. The same constitution bench, during the last hearing, dismissed the Modi government's affidavit, which claimed that the removal of Article 370 made possible the end of terrorism and ushered in an era of development and prosperity in Kashmir. The court said it would hear the debate on the constitutional and legal merits of the case and not on its political implications.
Four years after the abrogation of Article 370
According to analysts, the situation in Kashmir has been calm for the past few years. Day-to-day strikes, stone pelting, and protests have ended as separatist politics have been removed from the scene, hence educational and commercial activities continue throughout the year, tourist arrivals are steadily increasing and sports activities are on the rise. are also ongoing.
There is no reaction to any of the government's decisions and the government has 'total control' from social media to the streets. Work on roads, bridges, and tunnels is progressing apace, and India has held several meetings of G20 delegates in Srinagar, claiming that Kashmir is now 'free from separatism and extremism'.
After the removal of Article 370, the Modi government had claimed that there would be massive foreign investment in Jammu and Kashmir and 50,000 jobs would be created within six months and Kashmiris would also develop side by side with India. But when life resumed after the long ban, one scandal after another regarding government appointments came to light.
The government had to cancel at least four such lists that revealed corruption and back-door appointments. The Global Investor Summit for foreign investment which was announced to be held in November 2019 has not been held yet. However, the government claims that investment projects worth thousands of crores have been received by the government and are being worked on.
However, Justice Masoudi does not agree with this. Regarding the case under hearing in the Supreme Court, he said, "We are hopeful, but even if we lose in the court, we will continue the political struggle. Whatever the North-Eastern states have got, they have got it from the political struggle." Not met by the court.'
Has the security situation in Kashmir improved?
Just seven months after the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019, the Indian and Pakistani forces signed a new agreement to strictly implement the 20-year-old ceasefire agreement and the two countries' forces have been silent on the Line of Control since February 2020. And the shelling has stopped. Normal life in the areas near the LoC is peaceful and people continue farming and other activities without any fear or danger.
After the abrogation of Article 370, there was a massive operation against armed militants in Jammu and Kashmir and according to police data, more than 500 militants have been killed in the last three years. Meanwhile, there were several attacks on Kashmiri-speaking Hindus (Kashmiri Pandits) in which at least 9 people were killed. Most of them were Kashmiri Pandits who were brought back to Kashmir under the Prime Minister's package over the years, kept in safe camps, and given jobs.
According to the police, after these attacks, more than five thousand such Kashmiri Pandits protested on the streets for several months and most of them left Kashmir once again. The government says that the militants involved in these attacks have been killed in various clashes, but the feeling of insecurity among the minority sect has not completely disappeared.
What can happen in the Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court will hear the Article 370 case daily except Monday and Friday. Legal experts here say that the case is unlikely to be delayed as the court has already made it clear that the case will not be referred to a larger bench but will be heard by a five-member constitution bench.
Justice (R) Masoudi says, "Our arguments are solid." We are referring to the Constitution under which this decision was claimed to be taken. The debate may be long, but we have full faith in the country's judiciary.
However, neutral circles say that the removal of Article 370 from the Constitution has been one of the most important slogans of the BJP and its abolition has been widely hailed as a major achievement of the government.
Analyst Harun Rishi says that the government should not influence the judiciary, but I think the hearing may be delayed on some technicality, as Narendra Modi is expected to win again in next year's election. There have been, the defeat in the court of such a big decision can also be a political setback.
0 Comments
Welcome to daily life hacks