- Omar need now work for emotional & material reconstruction of his people
DAYA SAGAR
‘J&K’ has been the only ‘State” of India that has remained more in news after India became independent republic in comparison to other Indian states, not only that even compared with the pre 1947 times. The affairs related to J&K have been comparatively more attracting the attention of not only other Indian states but also the outside world. J&K has been the victim of the political ambitions of even those who have been in the race for rising to the seat of governance through the system of parliamentary democratic process that the Indian gave to their self through the Constitution of India what to talk of foreign powers including Pakistan & Pakistan supported separatist elements within the territories of India. It will not be out of place to mention here that affairs related to delayed offer of accession made by the then Prince of the princely state of J&K & reasons for delay expressed by him too had provided opportunity to Pakistan and a few otherwise opinion holders with in J&K to push the J&K related affairs into debates / discussions more particularly during the periods ( 1947 to 1950) the Constitution of India was being drafted and affairs related to acceding princely states were being attended. (even upto The States Reorganisation Act, 1956).
Keeping in view that in independent India after 1950 one would rise to power seats only through vote numbers and with ‘seats’ of governance in sight even people / leaders who did not have any pro Pakistan intentions or who did not have any separatist ideologies in 1947 have been directly or indirectly trying to draw political advantages for electoral purposes with in J&K and even outside J&K by quoting / describing & projecting the affairs / provisions/ policies related to J&K to their choice convenience without caring for any ideological or political damages that could be inflicted on emotional/ ideological/ psychological wits of even the common innocent masses of J&K what to talk of other states.
Let us not go in the details To be brief some named Art-370 of the COI not simply a Special Status Article but also like a distancing feature like a bridge where as it was not constitutionally a Special Status feature/ not a bridge between in Idia and “JK. Not only that there were some within J&K / outside J&K who said that they would remove Art 370 instead of correcting the other party by conveying that Art-370 did provide J&K any special status in Constitution of India/ nor was it a bridge & J&K was/is constitutionally integral part of India like any other Indian state ( although late but it was on April 11, 2015 in a written reply to Yajay Sabha Q-138* Government of India in very plain words said that Art-370 did not constitutionally provide any special status to J&K State and the State had constitutionally no special status in India); Some when to the extent of saying that J&K has a Special Status since J&K has her own flag like India has the Tri Color ( National Flag ) and to support their contention some took the cover of Delhi Agreement -1952 but here too instead dismissing their claims/ versions by saying that the J&K state flag was not like India National Flag the some of those who opposed the reasoning said they would work for J&K having no ‘separate’ Flag instead of correcting them ( wrong doers) even with the help of same Delhi Agreement -1952 which had said that State flag will be carried as a symbol of freedom struggle which will not be a rival of Indian National Flag and the status of Indian National Flag will be same in J&K as would be in other parts of India ( para / Clause -IV of The Delhi agreement said, < ” …. it was agreed by the State Government that the State flag would not be a rival of the Union flag; it was also recognised that the Union flag should have the same status and position in Jammu and Kashmir as in the rest of India,… ..”.>). Some even said J&K is constitutionally a Special State of India since the state has some retained sovereignty because state had her own separate Constitution and here too instead of correcting them that J&K constitution was not a separate constitution/ parallel to Constitution of India but had roots in Constitution of India itself which well reflected from the Preambles of COI & the J&K Constitution ( it has now been very much clarified in Dec 2023 in the Judgment passed by SC of India of 21-12-2023 related to some petitions initiated after 5th August 2019 in relation to Art-370 related issues too has said in Part-F Page 358 at Para 514 < 514-“a. The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not retain any element of sovereignty after the execution of the IoA and the issuance of the Proclamation dated 25 November 1949 by which the Constitution of India was adopted. The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not have ‘internal sovereignty’ which is distinguishable from the powers and privileges enjoyed by other States in thec ountry. Article 370 was a feature of asymmetric federalism and notsovereignty;”>) .; and like that the affairs had been/ were being mishandled, misquoted & miscarried all these years making many myths to seed & survive. Such like far and against contests have also been helpful in survival / promotion of separatist view points.
On 25th September 2013 it was reported through an official handout that the then J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah too had opined while talking to Head of a Delegation of the European Union to India Ambassador Joao Cravinho among other things like < “While all the states acceded to Union of India and then merged with it, JK only acceded and did not merge. That is why we have a special status, our own constitution and the state flag,”….”Political issues of Kashmir are not born with the militancy in 1990. “Their genesis is long back associated with the partition of the Country when the future of all States was decided other than JK,”>.But even then no pointed corrective advice was issued by any national level political party as well as Government of India. At least GOI could correct the Chief Minister by saying that Princely states like J&K had to only accede , it was only for smaller acceded identities to merge with larger identities for forming economically & administratively viable units of a State or UT of the India republic. Reference for merger not required in relation to J&K too has been there in the SC Judgement of 21 Dec 2023.
To Be Continued
(The writer is a Sr Journalist & a known analyst of J&K affairs)