For handling J&K, Government must first draw clear lines between separatist and mainstream ideologies

 By Daya Sagar
It has to be understood by all that there are some other Indian states also where the matters in the State List differ from the maters in the State List for other states, it does not matter what is the number. Only thing that needs to be noted is that the number of subjects included in Union List can be different for different states and that should not be quoted by any one for carrying the opinions that could even suggest taking a state out of the integral bonds of nationality. But as regards J&K such opinion makers have been allowed to ‘cultivate’ their political fields and they have done enough of damage to the peaceful living of the innocent common people. Some are even after near seven decades are even raising questions on the ‘totality’/ nature of accession of J&K with India. It is only due to this reason that some people who talk of ‘Kashmir’ having different identities and nationality than that of India have been able to gain enough space in the local society for them to the extent that even when they question the Indian Nationality still the governments appear to be under political pressures worth extending all the fundamental rights and constitutional covers to such elements who otherwise disown Indian citizenship/ nationality.
Some people are found suggesting, of course without any constitutionally valid logic, that all the laws / acts that have been passed by Parliament of India, before the constitution of Jammu and Kashmir was written and thereafter and as made applicable to J&K should be done away with / repealed. Can any government guarantee doing so constitutionally?
People who have been making such controversial demands include even those who have remained member of Parliament of India, member of J&K Legislature or have been at some time part of J&K Government or the elders of some of them have themselves while exercising the powers available as part of government or as available under the constitution facilitated for the direct jurisdiction of the Parliament of India on some additional matters like some other Indian States that were otherwise earlier included in the J&K specific State List.Why did they first do so, no one has seriously asked them.
Can those who rise against the nation or preach near treason can claim for any constitutional rights flowing from the same constitution that they themselves otherwise disown? Who will stay and who will not stay in Kashmir Valley can such decision be taken by those who preach constitutional separatism in Kashmir Valley ? Can such groups / class of people be accommodated on the tables where governments have to discuss solutions to the local issues agitating the citizens of India? And in case such people who talk of even extra territorial dimensions of the local issues worth associating the foreign viewpoints are also treated as ‘stake holders’ by the Union Government / Union leaders then, under the circumstances, there is surely something for the common subject of J&K (Kashmir Valley in particular) worth believing that what the separatists say about the political status of Jammu and Kashmir must have some substance.
Some have even in their vision suggested that the State of J&K should have independent access to even some foreign affairs and so far have been treated as main stream group / element by GOI. Government of India must make her opinion public in this regard without any rhetoric.GOI must draw clear lines between Separatist and mainstream ideologies
(Daya Sagar is a senior journalist and a social activist can be reached at [email protected]).