With the passing of The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill, 2019 that abrogates the special status granted to the state of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370, a series of debates on the constitutionality, rationality and logic behind the decision have emerged across the country. August 5, 2019, is being remarked as ‘The day of Sorrow’ by some, while others are hailing it to be ‘historic’.
MDMK MP Vaiko and TMC MP Derek O Brien voiced impressive rhetoric against the bill with the former calling it a “murder of the democracy” and the latter regarding it as “constitutional immorality and procedural hara-kiri”. High voltage drama unfolded in the Upper House as PDP MP Mir Mohammed Fayaz tore his own kurta. As Amit Shah once again rose to introduce one of the bills as it was not circulated before, PDP’s Nazir Ahmad Laway tore the Indian Constitution. This resulted in the PDP being ‘marshalled out’ of the house.
After almost a week of rumours and tension regarding the situation in the valley, the Home Minister of India, Amit Shah finally presented in Rajya Sabha, what could be regarded as the most important bill pertaining to Kashmir, presented by any government till date. The rumours fuelled by increased deployment of troops in the region and reports of a planned trifurcation of the state of J&K reached their peak points, first with the cancellation of the Amarnath Yatra and then with the putting of state leaders like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti under house arrest. The virtual shutting down of the valley with the imposition of Section 144 and a crackdown on means of communication created panic amongst the people.
Amidst discussions on the possible impacts that the decision might have, what is being overlooked is that the whole agenda of the debate seems to have undergone meticulous construction at a time when the government was just beginning to come under fire for a humungous slowdown in the economy. The BJP has yet again shown that one might cite agreement or disagreement with the politics it plays but it has mastered the art of rule by sharpening its political sword; this cannot be denied.
The BJP was so sure of the support it would gather on the decision, that it got the bill introduced and eventually passed in a house where it does not even command a majority. The BJP knows how and when to shift the point of political rhetoric and to have the ball in its own court by bringing the opposition to a point where opposing a certain bill would cost it a vote bank.
Following are some (and essentially, not the only) points of contention in the Bill:
- The bill stands passed without any opinion, consent or even responses from the stakeholders (given the crackdown on telecommunication services in the region). The passage of the bill has proved the point of how India has always valued the narrative of Kashmir and not the Kashmiris, quite evident from the hashtag trending on twitter a day ago that had the entire right-wing army tweeting, #KashmirHumaraHai.
- The passage of the bill has also brought to fore the extent to which powers of a government with an overwhelming majority can be exploited by it to suit the political narrative. Today the government uses a simple majority to decide on one of its poll promises, what if tomorrow the same is done to establish a Hindu Rashtra?
- A majority of Indians are claiming that democracy has won. How can it be justified that democracy stands victorious when a government lied to its people about a possible terror threat, when a region was militarised excessively, when it cancelled the Amarnath Yatra and made people evict haphazardly, when the people for whom the decision has been taken are nowhere a part of the deal. As Ramchandra Guha rightly stated, “This is not democracy, this is authoritarianism, the handiwork of paranoid, insecure rulers who daren’t even have a proper debate inside or outside Parliament.”
- The amount of time given to the MPs to debate on the issue was inadequate. 1.5 hours for debate on a 57-page long bill, full of legal jargon and points of conflict, dealing with a region that has geographically and historically been under conflict showcases the mockery being made out of Indian Parliamentary procedures.
- The opposition parties that supported the bill did it against the spirit of Indian Federalism. The BJP, in the decision, mustered support from regional parties like BSP, BJD, LJP, AIADMK, TDP, Shiv Sena, TRS, YSRC, RPI, Akali Dal and even the AAP(which has itself been asking for full statehood). From the Congress to the BJP, in this butchery of the principles of democracy, no party stands untainted.
- The text of the Law Ministry notification reads, “In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 370 of the Constitution, the President, with the concurrence of the Government of State of Jammu and Kashmir…” Equating a nominated governor to a representative government of the state in itself is a faulty admission. Bifurcation of the J&K assembly requires the consent of the J&K assembly. Any amendment through Article 370 to change subjects with which the Union deals also requires the consent of the J&K assembly. It is unconstitutional to do the same by attaining only the President’s or Governor’s consent.
- How the dismembering of a state by reducing it to a Union Territory could improve the situation in a region where demands for autonomy have been more vigorous than any other region in the country also makes one raise the brow.
- The decision to not hold elections in the State despite the 3 member committee report that stated that the situation in the valley was conducive to holding state assembly elections just after the Lok Sabha polls also makes one question the time of doing of the deed.
As Derek O Brien stated, “The right-wing is calling this The Final Solution! What does that mean? In 1942, this was the code name for the Nazi plan for genocide, to murder the Jews.”
In my opinion, Kashmir has been India’s festering sore. All the political parties of India along with their supporters have been carcinogenic to the situation in Kashmir. From Congress’ decision to not hold a plebiscite and to arrest Sheikh Abdullah, to the National Conference and PDP who ruled only to sharpen their political ambitions and finally to the BJP which has fulfilled what would whet the appetite of its ‘nationalist’ vote bank, all Indian Politicians have painted their hands red with the blood of Kashmiris who were tossed from one promise maker to other, thereby slaughtering the idea of a happy Kashmir. The Kashmiris have been victims to the foul play of power-hungry players: Indian and state politicians, separatist leaders and Pakistan alike.
M.K. Gandhi has rightly stated, “The means may be likened to a seed, the end to a tree; and there is just the same inviolable connection between the means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree.” We cannot get a rose through planting a noxious weed. The government has been trying to cosmeticise the decision by stating that it has been done to integrate India and is in the interest of the Kashmiris, but I still find it hard to believe that winning over hearts of people could come only by force.
Mr. Amit Shah is not Mao and India is not China, here power should come out of the right use of the Constitution and not the Barrel of the Gun. In an attempt to hug Kashmir, let us hope we don’t smother the Kashmiris.