A Detailed Report of Kashmir Issue

Written by – Yatharth Infinity.

Date – 22nd of June/2021.

A Brief History of Kashmir

The Buddhist and Hindu History of Kashmir 300 BC-1300 AD -

Kashmir valley was primarily a Hindu state ruled under the Mauryan Kingdom then by Kushan
Empire, Karkota dynasty and Utpala dynasty in about 1000 AD. It was a major centre of
Buddhism, Shaivism and other Hindu religious traditions up until late 1000 AD.

Amarnath yatra of Jammu and Kashmir.

Buddhist stupa near Baramulla,
Kanishka inaugurating
Kashmir.
Mahayana Buddhism in Kashmir.

Muslim Rule in Kashmir Valley 1350 -

The Decline of Hindu state of Kashmir begun with Lohara Dynasty
of 1000 -1320 AD. Which paved ways for Muslim invasion in
Kashmir.
The Islamic invaders came to Kashmir in and around 1350 with
Shah Mir who was the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir.
With the Mughal conquest of India, the region of Kashmir went
under them and the Hindu culture disappeared from Kashmir
valley.
After decline of Mughal empire in 1700s, Afghani Invaders started attacking Kashmir and main of
them was Ahmad Shah Abdali.
The Beginning of what we know today as Kashmir, started with Ahamad shah Abdali/ Durrani
(1722-1772).
It is not as old as it sounds and for a comparison, 3rd battle of Panipat in which Ahmad shah
durrani attacked India and defeated Maratha forces happened in 1761 (Restoring the Reign of
Shah Alam II).
Battle of Plassey happened in India in 1757. British were high on
expansionism and were setting feet in India.
Ahmed shah Abdali had established Durrani Empire by that time and it
was ruling a big area of Current Afghanistan and Pakistan.
This was a time of turmoil for Indian region as there was an ongoing
battle between various different forces, The British, French, Portuguese,
Maratha, Afghanis and regional forces of various states.

Then Came 1819 and Sikhs-

The Sikh Empire which was sending Expeditions into lower Kashmir region, as a strategic move
decided to attack the Durrani establishments in upper Kashmir region as Durrani Empire from
Afghanistan and Pakistan region was blocking the passes of Pir Panjal Range and hence the
supplies to Sikh militia were getting disrupted.
On 3rd of July, 1819. Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Sikh Empire attacked Kashmir region and
attempted to take over Sri Nagar. It was met with forces of Durrani empire which eventually lost
and Sikh Empire established in Kashmir region.

Sikh
Empire –
1839.
Kishor Singh was made King of Jammu region in 1819 under Ranjit Singh.
After his death in 1822, Raja Gulab Singh was appointed King of Jammu in
1822 by Maharaja Ranjit Singh.
Gulab Sing was the founder of Dogra dynasty and was a powerful king under
Sikh Empire who played a major role in carrying out various expeditions in
Kashmir region. He encircled the specific region of Kashmir by 1840 and
started ruling it well. Maharaja Ranjit Singh had died in 1839.

English Invasion of Kashmir in 1845 –

The First Anglo-Sikh War was fought between the Sikh Empire and the East India Company in
1845 and 1846 in and around the Ferozepur district of Punjab.

It resulted in defeat and partial subjugation of the Sikh kingdom and cession of Jammu and
Kashmir as a separate princely state under British suzerainty. Jammu and Kashmir was the biggest
princely state of British political administration.

Kashmir was ceded under the Treaty of Lahore to the East India Company, which transferred it to
Gulab Singh through the Treaty of Amritsar, in return for the payment of indemnity owed by the
Sikh empire. Gulab Singh took the title of the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir under British rule.
From 1846 after the successful establishment of English power over Kashmir region, Kashmir was
ruled by various rulers of Dogra dynasty one after the other.
The British Raj managed the defence, external affairs, and communications for the princely state
and stationed a British Resident in Srinagar to oversee the internal administration. According to
the 1941 census, the state's population was 77 percent Muslim, 20 percent Hindu and 3 percent
others (Sikhs and Buddhists).
Kashmir even before the conquest by Sikh Empire, was dominated by the powers of various
Muslim states of Central India and Afghanistan. Hence most of the population was Muslim.
Despite its Muslim majority, the princely rule was an overwhelmingly a Hindu-dominated state as
the rulers were descendent of Gulab Singh who had roots in Sikh Empire which was majorly
Hinduism oriented. The Muslim majority suffered under the high taxes of the administration and
had few opportunities for growth and advancement.
Kashmir at the time of Partition 1947-

British rule in the Indian subcontinent ended in 1947 with the creation of new dominion states,
Pakistan and India.
562 Princely states which were under British paramountcy were left to choose their fate in
accordance to Independence act of 1947. They had a choice to either join India/ Pakistan or to
remain Independent.
Jammu and Kashmir, the largest of the princely states, had a predominantly Muslim population
ruled by the Hindu Maharaja Hari Singh.

Maharaja Hari Singh was in dilemma as to whom to choose or to

remain independent.
He decided to stay independent because he expected that the
State's Muslims would be unhappy with accession to India, and
the Hindus and Sikhs would become vulnerable if he joined
Pakistan.

On 11 August, the Maharaja dismissed his prime minister Ram Chandra Kak,
who had advocated independence. Observers and scholars interpret this action
as a tilt towards accession to India. Pakistanis decided to preempt this
possibility by wresting Kashmir by force if necessary.
The Trouble Begins (Sept- Oct 1947) -

Pakistan desperately wanted the Kashmir to join its dominion as that would have given Pakistan a
significant ground over India. In accordance with its desired policy, Pakistan made various efforts
to persuade the Maharaja of Kashmir to join Pakistan.

In July 1947, Mohammad Ali Jinnah is believed to have written to the Maharaja promising "every
sort of favourable treatment," followed by the lobbying of the State's Prime Minister by leaders of
Jinnah's Muslim League party.
Faced with the Maharaja's indecision on accession, the Muslim League agents clandestinely
worked in Poonch, J&K to encourage the local Muslims to an armed revolt, exploiting an internal
unrest regarding economic grievances.
Pakistan waged a private war by obstructing supplies and organizing large scale invasion of
Pushtoon Pathan tribesman (Commanded by Pakistan Army officers).
The Jammu division of the state got caught up in the Partition violence. Large numbers of Hindus
and Sikhs from Rawalpindi and Sialkot started arriving in March 1947, bringing "harrowing
stories of Muslim atrocities."
According to Ilyas Chattha, this provoked counter-violence on Jammu Muslims, which had "many
parallels with that in Sialkot." The violence in the eastern districts of Jammu that started in
September, developed into a widespread 'massacre' of Muslims around October, organized by the
Hindu Dogra troops of the State and perpetrated by the local Hindus, including members of the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, and the Hindus and Sikhs displaced from the neighboring areas of
West Pakistan.
The Maharaja himself was implicated in some instances. A large number of Muslims were killed.
Others fled to West Pakistan, some of whom made their way to the western districts of Poonch and
Mirpur, which were undergoing rebellion. Many of these Muslims believed that the Maharaja
ordered the killings in Jammu which instigated the Muslims in West Pakistan to join the uprising
in Poonch and help in the formation of the Azad Kashmir government.

The rebel forces in the western districts of Jammu were organized under the leadership of Sardar
Ibrahim, a Muslim Conference leader. They took control of most of the western parts of the State
by 22 October. On 24 October, they formed a provisional Azad Kashmir (free Kashmir)
government based in Palandri.

The Peaking of Trouble 1947 -

Justice Mahar Chand Mahajan, the Maharaja's nominee for his next prime minister, visited Nehru
and Patel in Delhi on 19 September 1947, requesting essential supplies which had been blockaded
by Pakistan since the beginning of September. He communicated the Maharaja's willingness to
accede to India. Nehru, however, demanded that the jailed political leader, Sheikh Abdullah, be
released from prison and involved in the state government. Only then would he allow the state to
accede. The Maharaja released Sheikh Abdullah on 29 September.

Maher Chand Mahajan Sheikh Abdullah Jawahar Lal Nehru

Sheikh Abdullah was a political activist leader who was against the Autocratic rule of Hari Singh
and was jailed in 1946 against his Quit Kashmir movement. He was towards accession to India as
he was a friend of Nehru and believed personally that Kashmir would be more autonomous in
Indian rule rather than under Pakistan. He was also content with promise of Plebiscite which was
mentioned in the Instrument of Accession, and terms of accession to India looked more favourable
to his opinion than to go with Pakistan.
Pakistan at the same time was attacking Kashmir with militia disguised as tribesman and Pashtun
tribes. There was violence. Hari Singh was ready to accede in exchange of military help from India.

The Maharaja's troops could not withstand the tribal militia attack in September and October
1947; they were heavily outnumbered and outgunned by the tribal militias, and were also facing
internal rebellions from Muslim troops.
The Maharaja made an urgent plea to Delhi for military assistance. Upon the Governor General
Lord Mountbatten's insistence, India required the Maharaja to accede before it could send troops.
Accordingly, the Maharaja signed an instrument of accession on 26 October 1947, which was
accepted by the Governor General the next day.

26 October 1947
While the Government of India accepted the accession, it added the proviso that it would be
submitted to a "reference to the people" after the state is cleared of the invaders, since "only the
people, not the Maharaja, could decide where Kashmiris wanted to live."; it was a provisional
accession.
The largest political party, National Conference, headed by Sheikh Abdullah, endorsed the
accession. In the words of the National Conference leader Syed Mir Qasim, India had the "legal" as
well as "moral" justification to send in the army through the Maharaja's accession and the people's
support of it.

The Indian troops, which were airlifted in the early hours of 27 October, secured the Srinagar
airport. The city of Srinagar was being patrolled by the National Conference volunteers with
Hindus and Sikhs moving about freely among Muslims, an "incredible sight" to visiting journalists.
The National Conference also worked with the Indian Army to secure the city.
Gilgit Agency Coup (POK), 1947-

In the north of the state lay the Gilgit Agency, which had been leased by British India but returned
to the Maharaja shortly before Independence. Gilgit's population did not favour the State's
accession to India.
Sensing their discontent, Major William Brown, the Maharaja's commander of the Gilgit Scouts,
mutinied on 1 November 1947, overthrowing the Governor Ghansara Singh.
The bloodless coup d'etat was planned by Brown to the last detail under the code name "Datta
Khel".
Major Brown had telegraphed Khan Abdul Qayyum Khan asking Pakistan to take over.

Pakistan's Political Agent, Khan Mohammad Alam Khan, arrived on 16 November and took over
the administration of Gilgit. According to various scholars, the people of Gilgit as well as those of
Chilas, Koh Ghizr, Ishkoman, Yasin, Punial, Hunza and Nagar joined Pakistan by choice.
This area is known now as Pakistani Occupied Kashmir.
Indian – Pakistani troops fight 1947-1948 -
Rebel forces from the western districts of the State and the Pakistani Pakhtoon tribesmen which
were most possibly Pakistani soldiers dressed without uniforms, made rapid advances into the
Baramulla sector.

BARAMULLA In the Kashmir valley, National

Conference volunteers under the
Sheikh Abdullah worked with
the Indian Army to drive out the
'raiders'. (Pakistani Soldiers)
The resulting First Kashmir War
lasted until the end of 1948.

The Pakistan army made available arms, ammunition and supplies to the rebel forces who were
dubbed the "Azad Army". Pakistani army officers "conveniently" on leave and the former officers
of the Indian National Army were recruited to command the forces.

In May 1948, the Pakistani army officially entered the conflict, in theory to defend the Pakistan
borders, but it made plans to push towards Jammu and cut the lines of communications of the
Indian forces in the Mendhar valley.
Pakistani soldiers and tribesman captured Rajouri on 7 November 1947, which began the Rajouri
Massacres of 30,000+ Hindus and Sikhs, locals and refugees from Partition. The massacres would
only end with the Indian Army recapturing Rajouri in April 1948.
On 25 November 1947, the Pakistani tribesmen and soldiers attacked and took over Mirpur, and
began the Mirpur Massacre of Hindus and Sikhs in the area. An estimated 20,000+ Hindus and
Sikhs were killed overall. Rapes and other crimes were also committed during the aftermath.

According to Jinnah, India acquired the accession through "fraud and violence". A plebiscite was
unnecessary and states should accede according to their majority population. He was willing to
urge Junagadh to accede to India in return for Kashmir. For a plebiscite, Jinnah demanded
simultaneous troop withdrawal for he felt that 'the average Muslim would never have the courage
to vote for Pakistan' in the presence of Indian troops and with Sheikh Abdullah in power.
When Mountbatten countered that the plebiscite could be conducted by the United Nations,
Jinnah, hoping that the invasion would succeed and Pakistan might lose a plebiscite, again
rejected the proposal, stating that the Governors Generals should conduct it instead. Mountbatten
noted that it was untenable given his constitutional position and India did not accept Jinnah's
demand of removing Sheikh Abdullah.

Prime Ministers Nehru and Liaquat Ali Khan met again in December 1948, when Nehru informed
Khan of India's intention to refer the dispute to the United Nations under article 35 of the UN
Charter, which allows the member states to bring to the Security Council attention situations
'likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace'.
The Case Goes to United Nations, April 1948 –
India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council, despite Sheikh Abdullah's
opposition to it. The UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948.
The measure called for an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to
secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals.
It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the
circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the
state to India or Pakistan.'
However, it was not until 1 January 1949 that the ceasefire could be put into effect.

No Solution 1949 -
India’s Case -
The Indian government considered itself to be under legal possession of Jammu and Kashmir by
virtue of the accession of the state. The assistance given by Pakistan to the rebel forces and the
Pakhtoon tribes was held to be a hostile act and the further involvement of the Pakistan army was
taken to be an invasion of Indian territory. From the Indian perspective, the plebiscite was meant
to confirm the accession, which was in all respects already complete.
Pakistan’s Case -
The Pakistan government held that the state of Jammu and Kashmir had executed a standstill
agreement with Pakistan which precluded it from entering into agreements with other countries. It
also held that the Maharaja had no authority left to execute accession because his people had
revolted and he had to flee the capital. It believed that the Azad Kashmir movement, as well as the
tribal incursions, were indigenous and spontaneous, and Pakistan's assistance to them was not
open to criticism.
Impasse – No country agreed for Demilitarization because of trust issues. No plebiscite was
carried.
India did not want the Plebiscite to happen as the case was now under United Nation’s judiciary
watch and even after Pakistan’s demilitarization had India occupied J&K by force, against
plebiscite it would be against UN decision or measure. It was in India’s interest to keep rejecting
proposals by UN and delay the Plebiscite or never let it happen.
Dixon Plan 1949 –
After the failure of UNCIP measures because of internal reasons between India and Pakistan, the
UNCIP appointed Sir Owen Dixon, to implement demilitarization prior to a statewide plebiscite on
the basis of General McNaughton's scheme, and to recommend solutions to the two governments.
Dixon's efforts for a statewide plebiscite came to naught due to India's constant rejection of the
various alternative demilitarization proposals, for which Dixon rebuked India harshly.

The Suggestion of Usual European Way – Division

Dixon then offered an alternative proposal, widely known as the Dixon plan.
Dixon did not view the state of Jammu and Kashmir as one homogeneous
unit and therefore proposed that a plebiscite be limited to the Valley.
Dixon agreed that people in Jammu and Ladakh were clearly in favour of
India; equally clearly, those in Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas
wanted to be part of Pakistan. This left the Kashmir Valley and 'perhaps
some adjacent country' around Muzaffarabad in uncertain political terrain.
Pakistan did not accept this plan because it believed that India's
commitment to a plebiscite for the whole state should not be abandoned.

Pakistan favored Complete Plebiscite because it believed that after the case has been transferred to
UN, the happening of Plebiscite would give Pakistan a bigger area than it was actually aspiring to
take through force in the Indo- Pakistan war.
Dixon also had concerns that the Kashmiris, not being high-spirited people, may vote under fear or
improper influences.
Following Pakistan's objections, he proposed that Sheikh Abdullah administration should be held
in "commission" (in abeyance) while the plebiscite was held. This was not acceptable to India
which rejected the Dixon plan. Another grounds for India's rejection of the limited plebiscite was
that it wanted Indian troops to remain in Kashmir for "security purposes", but would not allow
Pakistani troops the same. However, Dixon's plan had encapsulated a withdrawal by both sides.
Dixon had believed a neutral administration would be essential for a fair plebiscite.
Dixon concluded that India would never agree to conditions and a demilitarization which would
ensure a free and fair plebiscite.
In a nutshell, India wanted no plebiscite and also to keep the military intact in Kashmir region.
The Pakistan wanted Plebiscite while keeping the military in Kashmir region.
Both wanted to acquire large territories in Kashmir.
It was an error made by Jawahar Lal Nehru to have taken Kashmir issue to UN under British
pressure. Indian army was winning battles in Kashmir and it could have captured whole Kashmir
region in time.
1950 military standoff and Nehru Liaqat Pact of 1950 -
India convened a Constitution Assembly in J&K in July 1950, Pakistan went to UNSC to protest
against it saying that it was against the resolution and commitment of India and Pakistan towards
Kashmir. UN said the same. Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah rejected the resolution and told UNSC
that they will get no help in implementing the resolution in India.

The Commonwealth had taken up the Kashmir issue in January 1951 and it suggested that
Commonwealth force be stationed in Kashmir; that a joint Indo-Pakistani force be stationed in
Kashmir and the plebiscite administrator be entitled to raise local troops while the plebiscite
would be held.
Pakistan accepted these proposals but India rejected them because India did not want Plebiscite to
happen.
The UN Security Council called on India and Pakistan to honour the resolutions of plebiscite both
had accepted in 1948 and 1949 during the UN missions.
Pakistan agreed but Nehru said he would not allow a third person to decide the fate of four million
people. Korbel criticized India's stance towards a ″valid″ and ″recommended technique of
international co-operation. ″ (Nehru had realized his mistake to have headed to UN by then and so
took back from the resolution).

Nehru and Liaquat opened channel of communication and

reached an agreement in April 1950. Under the Nehru-
Liaquat pact
refugees were allowed to return unmolested to dispose of
their property
abducted women and looted property were to be returned
forced conversions were unrecognized
minority rights were confirmed

However, the peace was short-lived. Later by 1953, Sheikh Abdullah, who was by then in favour of
resolving Kashmir by a plebiscite, fell out with the Indian government. He had realized that Indian
government was never intending to go for any Plebiscite.
He was dismissed from the constitution assembly and imprisoned in August 1953. His former
deputy, Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad was appointed as the prime minister, and Indian security
forces were deployed in the Valley to control the streets.
Nehru's plebiscite offer 1953 and Status Quo -
Soon after the election of Bogra as Prime Minister in Pakistan he met Nehru in London. A second
meeting followed in Delhi in the backdrop of unrest in Kashmir following Sheikh Abdullah's arrest.
The two sides agreed to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir.

They also agreed informally to not retain the UN-appointed

plebiscite administrator Nimitz because India felt a pro-
Pakistan bias on America's part. An outcry in Pakistan's
press against agreeing to India's demand was ignored by
both Bogra and Nehru who kept the negotiations on track.

Pakistan then signed a Pact with USA regarding to Military aid and training. Although USA offered
the same to India, Nehru became hostile to USA – Pakistan pact and said there will be no
Plebiscite, in May 1954. This pact gave a stronger reason to India to validate the no plebiscite
intent. Pakistan signed the Pact with USA because it believed that India wanted to invade POK.
No Plebiscite or anything ever happened. Only the Constituency elections take place in Kashmir.
Status quo has been maintained since then.
Two major happenings took place in Kashmir in 1987, when state elections in Kashmir were
accused to be rigged by Indian government and in 1990 when Indian Army killed about 150
protestors willing for Azad Kashmir.
Pakistan backed terrorists and Hurriyat groups persecuted the Hindu population, Kashmiri
Pandits in 1990 and slaughtered many, Gang raped many accounting to large scale violence.
Indian Army imposed Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA) then.
After that Insurgency and Militant culture grew in Kashmir valley.
Leaders of National conference party and Azad Kashmir have become separatist.
Many Kashmiris have called for independence. India has blamed Pakistan for stirring up trouble.
Pakistan has blamed India for oppressing Kashmiris just as Israelis persecute Palestinians.
Tensions have frequently run high. Casualties on the militarized Line of Control are a regular
occurrence. Full-scale conflict between India and Pakistan has broken out in 1947, 1965, 1971,
1985 and 1998.
What are the Article 370 and 35A –

Where did they come from –

When Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession with India, it was
based on 3 matters: Defense, Foreign Affairs and Communications. Rest all matters were to
remain a state subject according to clause 7 of Instrument of Accession.
It also said that Kashmir could not be forced to accept any future Central Indian constitution.
The Indian government then started to form the Constitution and Constitution assembly.
Initially it was the idea that various princely states would form their own assemblies and
constitution. Some even did (Saurashta, Travancor- Cochin and Mysore).
On 19 May, 1949 it was decided that there was no need of different constitutions and a single
unified constitution would be applied to all states of India.

Kashmir’s Stand –

Kashmir under Sheikh Abdulla’s government had a representative community to the state
constitution assembly which requested to Indian government that the Countries constitution
should only include the original 3 accession terms (Defense, Foreign affairs and Communication)
and rest all will be decided by J&K state assembly itself.
In accordance to this request based on the instrument of Accession, article 370 was incorporated
into Indian constitution. It stipulated that the other articles of the Constitution that gave powers to
the Central Government would be applied to Jammu and Kashmir only with the concurrence of the
State's constituent assembly.
It was incorporated as a temporary provision as the J&K state constitution assembly said it would
form its own state constitution. But on 25th January, 1950 without forming any constitution, the
assembly dissolved itself.
Now, as there was no assembly, there was nobody to give concurrence to the central power
directions. Henceforth the article 370 became a permanent part of the Indian constitution.

What does Article 370 say –

Only Article 1 (That defines what is India, and Article 370 will be applied to J&K.
It exempted the State from the complete applicability of the Constitution of India. The State was
conferred the power to have its own constitution.
Central legislative powers over the State were limited, at the time of framing, to the three subjects
of defence, foreign affairs and communications.
Other constitutional powers of the Central Government could be extended to the State only with
the concurrence of the State Government.
The 'concurrence' was only provisional. It had to be ratified by the State's Constituent Assembly.
The State Government's authority to give 'concurrence' lasted only until the State Constituent
Assembly was convened. Once the State Constituent Assembly finalized the scheme of powers and
dispersed, no further extension of powers was possible.
Article 370 could be abrogated or amended only upon the recommendation of the State's
Constituent Assembly.

Article 35A –

Article 35A of the Indian Constitution was an article that empowered the Jammu and Kashmir
state's legislature to define "permanent residents" of the state and provide special rights and
privileges to them.
It was added to the Constitution through a Presidential Order, i.e., The Constitution (Application
to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954 – issued by the President of India under Article 370.
The state of Jammu and Kashmir defined these privileges to include the ability to purchase land
and immovable property, ability to vote and contest elections, seeking government employment
and availing other state benefits such as higher education and health care. Non-permanent
residents of the state, even if Indian citizens, were not entitled to these 'privileges'.

What were the Presidential Orders of 1950 and 1954 -

When Constitution of India was enacted, came with it the special status of J&K, the order ratifying
it is known as presidential order of 1950. Similarly, Article 35A was included via a presidential
order passed in the year of 1954.

Consultation and Concurrence -

According to Article 370, which granted special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, for the
Central government to extent the coverage of a central law to the state on subjects included in the
Instrument of Accession (IoA) (Defense, Foreign Affairs and Communication), it needed
"consultation" while for extending the coverage of laws on other subjects, it needed
"concurrence" of the state government.
What Happened in 2019 –

When the Modi Government came into power for the second term, it was keen to act upon what
was in its election campaign manifesto. Making Kashmir an integral part of India.
In August 2019, Military buildup started taking place in Kashmir, something big was going to
happen.

5 August 2019 –
India issued a Presidential order superseding the 1954 order that made all the provisions of the
Indian constitution applicable to Jammu and Kashmir. Following the resolutions passed in both
houses of the parliament, the President of India issued a further order on 6 August declaring all
the clauses of Article 370 except clause 1 to be inoperative. With the scrapping of Article 370,
Article 35A also stood removed automatically.
Was it Legally Correct –
How the Indian Government made sure it was Legal –
In short, GOI had Satya Pal Makil as Governor in J&K. It changed then the
interpretation of State assembly to mean Legislative assembly. Then under
president’s rule used the changed meaning of Legislative assembly to automatically
imply the Parliament of India. And hence the concurrence to pass the order was
obtained.
Not to forget that the President’s rule was imposed since one year ago (Dec, 2018)
when government of J&K was reduced to a minority after pulling back of BJP
coalition.

The August 2019 Presidential order stated that all the provisions of the Indian Constitution
applied to Jammu and Kashmir. This in effect meant that the separate Constitution of Jammu and
Kashmir stood abrogated, and a single constitution now applied to all the Indian states.

The President issued the order with the "concurrence of the Government of State of Jammu and
Kashmir". This in effect meant the concurrence of the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir since
President's rule was imposed at that time in the state.
The order was issued using the third clause of Article 370, which authorized the President of India
to declare the article inoperative with exceptions and modifications, if recommended by the (non-
existent) state constituent assembly to do so.
To circumvent the legal issue of the non-existent state constituent assembly, the President used the
Clause (I) of Article 370, which conferred him with the power to modify the Indian Constitution on
subjects related to Jammu and Kashmir. So, he first added a new clause to Article 367, which deals
with interpretation of the Constitution.
He replaced the phrase 'Constituent Assembly of the State' with 'Legislative Assembly of the State'.
Since the state legislative assembly has been suspended, the order says that any reference to the
legislative assembly will be construed as a reference to the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir.
The governor is an appointee of the Central government. Therefore, the Indian Parliament now
functions for the state legislative assembly.
Hence, the Indian Home Minister moved a resolution in the Rajya Sabha to give the President the
necessary recommendation he needs to declare Article 370 as inoperative.
Subsequently, the statutory resolution seeking the revocation of the special status under Article
370 and the bill for the state's reorganization was debated and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 5
August 2019 with 125 (67%) votes in its favour and 61 (33%) against it. On 6 August, the bill for
the reorganization was debated and passed by the Lok Sabha with 370 (86%) votes in its favour
and 70 (14%) against it, and the resolution recommending the revocation was passed by 351 votes
in favour and 72 against.
What was the reorganization act of J&K, 2019 –
The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 is an act of the Parliament of India containing
provisions to reconstitute the State of Jammu and Kashmir, a part of the larger region of Kashmir
which has been the subject of dispute among India, Pakistan, and China since 1947, into two union
territories called Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh, on 31 October 2019.
Bill was passed on 9 Aug 2019 but came into effect from 31 October 2019 when President’s rule
was lifted and a Lt. Governor was appointed for UTs of J&K and Ladakh.

What does the Act Say –

It reorganizes the J&K state into two Union territories. Ladakh UT and J&K UT. J&K UT would
have a Legislative assembly while Ladakh UT will only have a Lt. Governor. Ladakh UT will have 2
districts, Leh and Kargil. All other districts would be in J&K UT. State had 6 Lok Sabha seats, they
shall be divided as 5+1 between J&K and Ladakh UT. High court will be in J&K.

Special -
The act provides that the administration of the Jammu and Kashmir will be as per Article 239A of
the Indian constitution. Article 239A, originally formulated for the union territory of Puducherry,
will also be applicable to Jammu and Kashmir.

What does Article 239A say -

Central Government Act
Article 239 in The Constitution Of India 1949
239. Administration of Union territories
(1) Save as otherwise provided by Parliament by law, every Union territory shall be administered
by the President acting, to such extent as he thinks fit, through an administrator to be appointed
by him with such designation as he may specify
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Part VI, the President may appoint the Governor of a
State as the administrator of an adjoining Union territory, and where a Governor is so appointed,
he shall exercise his functions as such administrator independently of his Council of Ministers

A lieutenant governor appointed by the president will administer the union territory of Jammu
and Kashmir, which will have a legislative assembly of 107 to 114 members, with a tenure of five
years. The legislative assembly may make laws for any of the matters in the state list except "public
order" and "police", which will remain as the law-making powers of the union government. A
Council of Ministers including a Chief Minister will be appointed by the lieutenant governor from
the members of the legislative assembly, with the role to advise the lieutenant governor in the
exercise of functions in matters under the legislative assembly's jurisdiction. In other matters, the
lieutenant governor is empowered to act in his own capacity, who will also have the power to
promulgate ordinances having the same force as acts enacted by the legislature.
 R.K Mathur (Present Lt. Gov of Ladakh UT)

Manoj Sinha (Present Lt. Gov of J&K).

Who are against all this –

There are 5 main parties which are opposing the abrogation of Article 370 and 35A.

1. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC)

2. Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party (J&K PDP)
3. Communist Party of India (CPI-Marxist)
4. Jammu and Kashmir Awami National Conference (J&K ANC)
5. Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Movement (J&K PM)

Omar Abdullah Mehbooba Mufti CPIM Begum Khalida shah Shah Faisal
(JKNC) (PDP) (JKANC) (JKPM)
What did they all do –
After Scraping of Article 370 and Article 35A, these leaders gave various speeches which instigated
violence in the valley.

How Indian Government Responded –

Almost all top leaders were first arrested in August 2019 and later shifted to house arrests.
Who were arrested – Fraooq Abdullah, Omar Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti, Shah Faisal, Syed Ali
Ghilani, Umar Farooq, Main Abdul Qayoom.

By June- July 2020, all of them were freed, Mehbuba mufti was also released in October 2020.
So, what did these all do after being released –
They collected and formed an alliance, known as Gupkar alliance in October 2020. Which
demands the re-enactment of both Article 370 and 35A and reformation of J&K to a state.

People's Alliance for Gupkar Declaration

First Declaration –
1. That all the parties would be united in their resolve to protect and defend the identity, autonomy
and special status of J&K against all attacks and onslaughts whatsoever.
2. That modification, abrogation of Articles 35A, 370, unconstitutional delimitation or trifurcation
of the State would be an aggression against the people of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
3. That the parties participating in the meeting resolved to seek audience with the President and
Prime Minister of India and the leaders of other political parties to apprise them of the current
situation and make an appeal to them to safeguard the legitimate interests of the people of the
State with regard to the guarantees given to the State by the Constitution of our country.
Current Developments in 2021 –

On June 24, 2021 PM Narendra Modi is calling an All-Party Meeting. Gupkar alliance has been
invited and they have decided to attend the All-Party meeting with Mehbooba Mufti as head of
Alliance.

What is going to be discussed -

1. Delimitation of J&K
2. Plan for Assembly Elections
3. Statehood of J&K
4. Article 370 and 35A.

Why is PM Modi inviting them at all –

Because after Mehbooba mufti, Assembly elections have not been held in J&K and political process
in the UT is at halt. According to the rules, a plan for general elections have to be formed for J&K
and it is mandatory to consult the parties who represent the community there. It can also be
another formality or a genuine attempt. Things shall be clear after the meeting.
What is Delimitation in J&K –

Last Assembly polls happened in 2014.

On Independence Day last year in 2020, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said elections would
be held in J&K after the delimitation process in the Union Territory was over. Delimitation is
crucial for kick-starting the political process in J&K.

What is delimitation and why is it needed?

Delimitation is the act of redrawing boundaries of an Assembly or Lok Sabha seat to represent
changes in population over time. This exercise is carried out by a Delimitation Commission, whose
orders have the force of law and cannot be questioned before any court.
The objective is to redraw boundaries (based on the data of the last Census) in a way so that the
population of all seats, as far as practicable, be the same throughout the State. Aside from
changing the limits of a constituency, the process may result in change in the number of seats in a
state.

How often has delimitation been carried out in J&K -

Delimitation exercises in J&K in the past have been slightly different from those in the rest of the
country because of the region’s special status — which was scrapped by the Centre in August 2019.
Until then, delimitation of Lok Sabha seats in J&K was governed by the Constitution of India, but
the delimitation of the state’s Assembly seats was governed by the Jammu and Kashmir
Constitution and Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957.

Assembly seats in J&K were delimited in 1963, 1973 and 1995. After the 2001 census as the J&K
Assembly passed a law putting a freeze on the fresh delimitation of seats until 2026. This freeze
was upheld by the Supreme Court. The J&K Assembly, at that time, had 87 seats — 46 in Kashmir,
37 in Jammu and 4 in Ladakh. Twenty-four more seats are reserved for Pakistan-occupied
Kashmir. The freeze, some political parties argue, has created inequity for Jammu region.
 State Assembly seats (90+24) and Lok Sabha Seats (6) in J&K.

The Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir was dissolved by Governor on 21 November
2018. New elections were expected within a period of 6 months but have subsequently been
postponed to allow for the implementation of new constituency boundaries.
In March 2020, a three-member Delimitation Commission was formed, chaired by retired Justice
Ranjana Prakash Desai, for the delimitation of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The
commission is expected to provide its recommendations within two years of formation (i.e. by
April 2022).

Opposition by regional parties

Until very recently, the regional parties, including National Conference (NC) and the Peoples
Democratic Party (PDP)- the two biggest parties in the UT- had vehemently opposed the exercise.
As they are distressed over the method by which centre decides the share of regional seats. They
claim that centre’s method puts more emphasis on Jammu region while Kashmir region is
neglected.
The Commission had called for a meeting in February 2021, where only two of its five associate
members– Union Minister Jitendra Singh and Member of Parliament Jugal Kishore attended. The
other members such as National Conference leaders Dr Farooq Abdullah and Members of
Parliament Hasnain Masoodi and Mohammad Akbar Lone did not attend.
Former Chief Minister and PDP president Mehbooba had in February alleged that the Centre was
"railroading" delimitation in Jammu and Kashmir with a "tearing hurry", raising serious
apprehensions about the motives of the exercise.

The End Line -

Gupkar Alliance is ready to meet PM Modi on June 24 about discussions over delimitation
Process, Statehood and Article 370 and 35A revocation. Further details are awaited.

Compiled by – Yatharth.