The Centre’s Kashmir policy and a heavy price to pay (The Hindu)

Mains Paper 2:Polity
Prelims level: Reorganisation Act of August 2019
Mains level: Centre’s role in Kashmir policy

Context:

• While public attention is focused on COVID-19, Jammu and Kashmir suffers twin lockdowns, rising violence and unilateral government actions, all at the same time.
• In the 12 months since the Narendra Modi administration returned to office, their Kashmir policy has comprised measures that are perceivedas disasters in the Valley.
• It has garnered mixed reactions in Jammu and Ladakh, and are welcomed by some in the rest of India.

A clear Bias:

• The latest of these actions is the new domicilerules, notified on May 18, 2020.
• Based on the Home Ministry’s order of March 31, these rules seek to replace the Jammu and Kashmir State subjects law, recognised under Article 35A of the Indian Constitution.
• Article 35A entitled permanent residents of the State to free education along with reservation of government jobs, and sole rights to land ownership.
• The new domicile rules entitle anyone who has worked or lived in the State for 15 years, or studied there for seven years, to receive a domicile certificate and the benefits previously reserved for permanent residents.
• Curiously, they also entitle Union government officials who have served in the State for 10 years to domicile, along with their non-resident children.
• List of the categories of those eligible: members of the Indian Administrative Services, public sector units and banks, central universities and ‘recognised research institutes of the Central government’.
• The clear bias to favour not only Union government ..............................................................................................

CLICK HERE FOR FULL EDITORIAL (Only for Course Members)

Under Constitutional Challenge:

• They ignore the fact that the presidential orders and Reorganisation Act of August 2019, including all actions that follow from them, are under constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court.
• A democratic government that upholds the rule of law would freeze implementation until the court rules, but the Modi administration proceeded to build facts on the ground with astonishing rapidity.
• Within months of the August announcements, separate committees were set up to divide Jammu and Kashmir’s assets between the two new Union Territories. The State police was put under direct rule by the Union Home Ministry.
• The Upper House of the Assembly was abolished.
• Land was requisitioned for sale to industry, national tourist conglomerates were invited to take over what was a flourishing local industry, and mining rights were sold to non-Kashmiri contractors.
• All the former State’s statutory bodies were dissolved, including the State Human Rights Commission. Power was concentrated in the hands of the Lieutenant-Governor and his advisers, all but one of whom were from outside the former State.
• The Jammu and Kashmir Legislature remains dissolved, many of its political leaders remain under detention and forbidden to speak, a ban remains in force on all public gatherings and the media are intimidated.
• Even so, protest against the new domicile rules has been voiced by all political parties in Jammu and Kashmir, except the BJP.
• Indications are that their protests will be ignored. BJP General-Secretary calls the new domicile rules a done deal, implying that the Modi administration will not review them.

Fall of the last bastion:

• Most people in Jammu and Kashmir saw Article 35A and the State subject law as the last remaining bastion of the State’s internal autonomy, guaranteed under the instrument of accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh.
• Successive Union governments chipped away at the former State’s powers, but none touched Article 35A or the State subject law.
• Gradually the two grew to be inextricablytied to Kashmiri identity and, equally ...........................................................................................

CLICK HERE FOR FULL EDITORIAL (Only for Course Members)

Conclusion:

• With the fall of this last bastion, disaffection has exponentially multiplied in Jammu and Kashmir. Armed encounters are on the rise and the security situation is extremely fragile.
• Blaming it on Pakistan is futile. Pakistan has always taken advantage of disaffection in the Valley, indeed China is now doing so too.
• As a result of the Modi administration’s Kashmir policy, India will have to face mountingsecurity threats on its western front, and the people of Jammu and Kashmir the systematic denial of their rights.
• Are we really ready to pay this price for a mere ideological shibboleth?

Online Coaching for UPSC PRE Exam

General Studies Pre. Cum Mains Study Materials

Prelims Questions:

Q1. With reference to the economic slowdown, consider the following statements:
1. The International Monetary Fund used the phrase ‘Great Lockdown’ to summarize how the world economy had been upended due to novel coronavirus.
2. Pandession, is a name suggested by economist David McWilliams to show the deepest recession in global growth since the Great Depression due to Covid19 pandemic.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Answer:

CLICK HERE FOR FULL EDITORIAL (Only for Course Members)

Mains Questions:
Q1. Describe the centre’s role in .......................................................................