Article 370 is a key feature in India’s Constitution that pertained to the special status of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The Supreme Court, an apex court in India, recently rendered its verdict on amendments made to this article by the Union government in 2019. These amendments led to the revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and its reclassification as a Union Territory.
What Did the Supreme Court’s Recent Judgement Decide?
The Supreme Court announced that the Constitutional order that abolished Article 370 was valid. This decision had multiple implications. Firstly, it implied that Jammu and Kashmir did not possess sovereignty as the Constitutions of India and Jammu and Kashmir, along with Article 370, showed that no merger agreement was necessary for Kashmir to surrender its sovereignty. Furthermore, the court deemed Article 370 a temporary provision, noting that the Constitution framers placed it within the temporary provisions contained in Part XXI.
The court also upheld the President’s power to make irreversible changes, like dissolving the State Assembly. Finally, the court declared that it is unnecessary for the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, which only applied certain Indian constitutional provisions to J&K, to exist.
The Special Status of J&K: An Insight
On August 5, 2019, the President of India implemented the ‘Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019’ through the powers conferred by Article 370(1) of the Constitution. This move fundamentally altered the relationship between Jammu and Kashmir and the Indian Union. Article 370, added to the Indian constitution on October 17, 1949, allowed Jammu & Kashmir to draft its own constitution and limited the legislative powers of the Indian Parliament in the state.
Key Changes Brought by the 2019 Order
The 2019 order led to numerous alterations, including replacing the Presidential Order of 1954 and passing the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill, which split the state into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh. The permanent residents of J&K were stripped of dual citizenship, and the Fundamental Rights provided by the Indian constitution applied to them. The Ranbir Penal Code of Jammu and Kashmir was replaced with the Indian Penal Code.
Legal Challenges Faced in the Abrogation of Article 370
The implementation of the 2019 order faced several constitutional and federalism challenges. Critics argued that the Presidential order diluted J&K’s autonomy without a Constitutional Amendment and violated Article 3. Furthermore, J&K’s conversion into a Union Territory was criticized for bypassing the state’s Assembly and instead acquiring consent from the Governor.
Signs of Peace and Security in J&K Post Article 370’s Abrogation
After Article 370’s removal, J&K witnessed a decrease in incidents such as stone pelting and militancy, reduction in civilian injuries, and an increase in the arrests of militants and ‘Over-Ground Workers’. The number of stone-pelting incidents fell from 618 in 2019 to 222 in 2020, and terrorist acts decreased by 32% from August 2019 to June 2022.
International Responses to the Abrogation of Article 370
The move sparked varied responses from the international community. While Pakistan and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) objected to the changes, Russia stated that India made the changes within its constitutional framework. China did not recognise the unilaterally created Union Territory of Ladakh, and the United States expressed concerns about the restrictions in J&K.
Plans and Strategies Moving Forward
To address the legitimacy crisis in Kashmir, the government can embark on a comprehensive outreach programme for all Kashmiris. Implementing a 10-year strategy focusing on education, employment, and employability could aid in advancing Kashmir’s progress and eradicating terrorism by 2026. The government can also adopt the Gandhian path of non-violence and peace for conflict resolution in the region.
