Shauqueen Mizaj
The situation in Jammu and Kashmir continues to remain a bone of contention between neighbouring India and Pakistan, fuelling ongoing internal and international debates.
Article 370 was incorporated into the Indian Constitution in 1949, granting the state significant autonomy in the form of separate laws, a constitution, and even a flag, effectively empowering the state to determine the extent to which the Indian Constitution applies to it.
The State Assembly had the authority to abrogate Article 370 altogether, in which case all of the Indian Constitution would have applied to Jammu and Kashmi. Article 370 safeguarded the state’s unique cultural, social, and political identity. However, over the years, it became a divisive issue, with the government arguing that it hindered the complete integration of Jammu and Kashmir into India.
After winning the 2014 general elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), along with its Hindu nationalist paramilitary parent organisation, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), attempted to abrogate Article 370.
With a presidential order signed on August 5, 2019, the BJP government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi abrogated Article 370, superseding the 1954 order, and applying all Indian Constitution provisions to Jammu and Kashmir. The order was based on a resolution passed in both houses of India’s Parliament with a two-thirds majority. This led to the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.
The reorganisation was preceded by a lockdown in the Valley. The abrogation of Article 370 revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s decades-long special status and autonomy.
The move was backed by many as a means to fully integrate the region with the rest of India, while others opposed it, fearing that it could lead to demographic changes and a loss of identity for the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Security measures were beefed up in the region, and a temporary suspension of internet and communication services ensued to prevent potential unrest.
On July 11, nearly four years after Article 370 of the Constitution was abolished, the Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the government’s decision to revoke the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. The Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud and four of the most senior judges, observed that the case “concerns a pure constitutional challenge.”
A total of 23 petitions were presented to the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of changes made to Article 370 of the Constitution.
The pleas challenged the government’s “unilateral” move to impose curfews and unravel India’s unique federal structure by dividing Jammu and Kashmir “without taking consent from the people”.
They have questioned the Centre’s move, under the cover of the President’s Rule, to “undermine crucial elements of due process and the rule of law”.
The Article 370 case has been pending in the Supreme Court for over two years. It had not come up after a five-judge bench refused to refer the petition to a larger bench in March 2020.
The Modi government, however, defended the decision, saying the change had brought “peace, progress, and prosperity” to the restive territory.
In its 20-page affidavit, the government claimed that post abrogation of Article 370 “life has returned to normalcy in the region after over three decades of turmoil”. Mehbooba Mufti, the region’s former Chief Minister, said that the Supreme Court’s decision not to rely on the government’s affidavit “vindicates that it does not have a logical explanation to justify illegal abrogation of Article 370″, as quoted by Al Jazeera.
“Having said that, there are legitimate apprehensions about why the Supreme Court has taken up the Article 370 [issue] with such alacrity after remaining silent for four years. The decision to hear the case daily does evoke misgivings,” she added.
When direct rule was imposed in 2019, thousands of people across Indian-administered Kashmir, including almost all local political leaders, were detained. It was followed by a month-long internet shutdown, which cut communication in the territory as India positioned its armed forces in the region to contain protests.
The suspension of semi-autonomy in Kashmir also allowed Indians from elsewhere to buy land and claim government jobs in the territory, a policy condemned by critics as “settler colonialism”. Hundreds of new laws, replacing local ordinances, have also been promulgated by the region’s New Delhi-appointed governor.
The petitioners argued that it was akin to an overnight abrogation of democratic rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The day-to-day hearing of petitions by the Supreme Court, scheduled to begin August 2, will be closely watched by the nation and the international community alike.
Photo: On August 5, 2022, protesters in Singar, Kashmir, are being stopped by police as they demonstrate against the repeal of Article 370.
(Credit: Faisal Khan/Anadolu Agency)
