HVK Archives: Winning the alienated Kashmiris
Winning the alienated Kashmiris - The Hindu
Hari Om
()
3 July 1997
Title: Winning the alienated Kashmiris
Author: Hari Om
Publication: The Hindu
Date: July 3, 1997
The Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister and National Conference president, Dr.
Farooq Abdullah, uses all available fora in and outside India to reiterate
that his government is committed to making the Centre redefine the State's
politico-constitutional relations with New Delhi strictly in accordance
with what was provided for in the October 26, 1947 Instrument of Accession,
the January 26, 1950 Constitution Application Order and the July 24, 1952
Nehru-Sheikh Abdullah Delhi agreement. Everywhere he asserts that the root
cause of the seven-year-old insurgency and alienation of Kashmiris was the
conspiracy hatched by New Delhi and its Kashmiri agents to bypass these
three agreements under which Jammu and Kashmir was to enjoy maximum
internal autonomy - and to bring the State surreptitiously within the
purview of Central laws and institutions, and thereby at par with other
States, and erode the "Kashmiriat". Again, everywhere Dr. Abdullah puts
forth a solution which alone, according to him, can assuage the "hurt
feelings" of the Kashmiris and solve the 50-year-old "Kashmir problem." His
solution: the Centre must withdraw the Central laws and institutions
extended to the State after August 9, 1953, restore without any delay the
"pre-1953 constitutional position" and meet all its financial needs.
Will the restoration of the "pre-1953 constitutional position" strengthen
democracy or redress the grievances of the Kashmiris and reempower them to
mould their political and economic future, Even a non-rigorous scrutiny of
the political system as it existed in the State prior to the dismissal and
arrest of Sheikh Abdullah on August 9, 1953 suggests that this solution
will not work.
On the contrary, the State's return to the pre-1953 constitutional
position" will, apart from strengthening and emboldening the ardent
believers in the concept of 'Nizam-e-mustafa' and Jammu and Kashmir's
separation from India, at once subvert all democratic institutions, deprive
the common people of civil liberties and political rights and fetter the
press and the judiciary. The reason: such a drastic return will arm the
"Council of Ministers" with absolute, unbridled executive, legislative and
judicial powers.
Between September 7, 1939 and January 26. 1957, the ruling elite in the
State derived its authority from the Jammu and Kashmir Constitutional Act
(JKCA) of 1939. The ruler, Hari Singh, enacted this Act to mollify the
Kashmiris and their leader, Sheikh Abdullah. They had been demanding since
1931 the replacement of autocracy with democracy. Though a Legislative
Assembly with 75 elected and nominated members was set up in accordance
with the Act, Sheikh Abdullah and his colleagues continued their protest.
They opposed the JKCA on seven counts. First, it contained several
provisions which obstructed the formation of a "responsible government" and
facilitated the domination and exploitation of the people. Secondly, it
was not framed by a Constituent Assembly elected on adult franchise, but by
the ruler and his henchmen. Thirdly, the Act recognised the ruler and not
the people as the "fountain-head of all essential attributes of
sovereignty" with no court, person or body having the right to question his
measures. Fourthly, it did not recognise the "doctrine of supremacy of the
legislature." Fifthly, the JKCA did not provide for an independent
judiciary. Sixthly, it failed to repeal the highly obnoxious Jammu and
Kashmir Press and Publication Act (JKPPA) of' 1932. (This Act contained
provision after provision designed to imperil the development of a free
press. The ruling elite could seize any press it wanted and impose a heavy
fine on press-persons for publication of articles deemed "seditious".)
Seventhly, the JKCA, like the government of India Acts of 1909, 1919 and
1935, introduced the institution of "communal electorates."
Despite a five-year-long relentless struggle and several massive hartals,
strikes, demonstrations and violent clashes with the police, which claimed
several lives. Hari Singh did not introduce any democratic principle and
Sheikh Abdullah and other pro-democracy leaders stepped up their efforts to
seek the withdrawal of the highly dictatorial and anti-people Act. Their
efforts culminated in the "1946 Quit Kashmir movement", with the National
Conference cadre openly defying the ruler's authority, confronting the
police at several places and attacking police stations and other symbols of
the government to press for the dethronement of Hari Singh and the
establishment of a democratically elected people's government. Srinagar as
usual was the storm centre. Order could be restored only after the police
and the army swung into action and imprisoned Sheikh Abdullah and other
prominent pro-democracy leaders on the charge of sedition.
It was under these circumstances as well as in the wake of a full-scale
Pakistani war that Jammu and Kashmir acceded to the Indian dominion on
October 26, 1947. Ironically, the accession and Sheikh Abdullah's
appointment as the "Emergency Administrator" at the behest of Pandit Nehru
did not in any way improve the political lot of the people.
For, Sheikh Abdullah, rather than repealing the JKCA, exploited it to
consolidate his position, marginalised his senior and influential
colleagues such as Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad, Ghulam Mohammad Sadiq,
Mohi-ud-Din Kara and Maulana Masoodi and put down his political rivals in
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. He also exploited to the hilt the JKPPA and
muzzled the press with a view to preventing it from reporting and
commenting upon his misdeeds and anti-people and anti-democratic policies.
His rule was as autocratic as Hari Singh's.
It was only during the reign of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad (August
1953-September 1963) that a number of revolutionary steps were taken to
democratise the polity. These included the abrogation on May 14, 1954 of
Section 75 of the JKCA, under which the "Council of Ministers acted as the
final interpreter of the State Constitution", the abolition of the largely
committed Board of judicial Advisors and extension of the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court to Jammu and Kashmir on May 14, 1954 and the approval and
adoption on November 17, 1956 of a new Constitution by the people's
representatives in the Constituent Assembly and its launching on January
26, 1957. The most significant aspects of the Constitution were the
recognition of the people's natural right to shape and control fully their
political, administrative and economic policy and the grant of full freedom
to the press and the judiciary.
Thus it is clear that a return to the "pre-1953 constitutional position"
will grievously harm the legitimate political and democratic rights of the
Kashmiris and non-Kashmiris and enslave them again. The roots of the
Kashmiri alienation lie not in the Central laws, introduced after August 9,
1953, but in the National Conference's gross misrule, bureaucratic
bunglings and denial of a legitimate expression of the popular will. The
Centre must repudiate outright any such suggestion that seeks to
re-establish dictatorship, render the people ineffective for all purposes
and drive the State away from the country's mainstream. The Centre must
also ensure that Dr. Abdullah provides a clean, efficient, fair and
responsive administration - which is accountable to the people of this
militant-infested State. This is the only demand of an overwhelming majority.
Any attempt by the Centre to recognise the National Conference, which got
just 38 per cent of the total votes polled in the September 1996 Assembly
elections but won 66 per cent of the seats owing to the first-past-the-post
system, and similar outfits as the sole factor in the State's political
situation and accept their demands without analysing their implications
would have dangerous ramifications. Such an attempt will not only cause
portentous political explosions in Jammu and Ladakh and jeopardise the
legitimate political and cultural interests of the three lakh
internally-displaced Kashmiri Hindus, but also surely lead to balkanisation
of the country.
The need of the hour is to avert any such eventuality and make Dr. Abdullah
wind up Dr. Karan Singh's Greater Autonomy Committee. Neither Dr.
Abdullah's demand nor Dr. Karan Singh's Committee enjoys universal support
as the State, unlike others in the Union, already enjoys a maximum degree
of internal autonomy under Article 3 70. The State has its own
Constitution and flag and exercises all residual powers.
(The writer is Head, History Department, University of Jammu, Jammu.)
Back
Top
|
