The following
are Dr Jayaprakash Narayan’s responses to a few questions raised on the J&K division.
Q: Should Article 35 A be repealed?
Answer:
Article370 and Article35A must be repealed.
Article 35A and its variants in other States and regions of India
violate the fundamental rights, undermine unity and integrity of the nation,
and create impediments to economic growth, investment and job creation.
Therefore, repeal of Article 35A and other regulations/provisions all over
India restricting rights of all Indians is necessary. It should not be viewed
in isolation and the same principle should be applied to all of
India. Isolation of regions and communities in the misplaced belief of
‘protecting’ them only stunted economic growth, perpetrated poverty, stifled
innovation, retarded cross-fertilisation of cultures and ideas, and weakened
unity and integrity of the nation.
Q. Should Article 370 be repealed?
Answer:
Article370 and Article35A must be repealed.
The provisions of Article 370 were clearly intended to be transitional
and temporary. However there are two different sets of issues related to
Article 370. Those provisions that spawned legislation like Article 35A are
clearly unproductive and dysfunctional in this day and age of global supply
chains and disappearing trade barriers. Similarly, the provisions that limit
application of fundamental rights in any form, or violate
the principles of separation of powers, constitutional checks and balances,
universal franchise, democracy and people’s sovereignty expressed through the
elected legislatures should be recognised as anachronistic and dysfunctional.
Q. Do you support regional autonomy for Jammu and Ladakh?
Answer:
Jammu and
Ladakh have been seeking regional autonomy. I believe they should have
autonomy. The model of autonomy should be discussed: a) it could be regional
councils in the pattern of Telangana Regional Council we had until mid-70’s. b)
it could be Meghalaya pattern before it became a full-fledged State. I believe
similar flexible models should be evolved wherever there are demands/need of
that kind. It is best to encourage all stakeholders in a State to hammer out a
compromise, and then Parliament must sanctify it as law. If the choice in such
cases is between local autonomy and separate statehood, then the contenders
will usually agree on a compromise.
Q. What is your view on creation of union territories through unilateral
decision making of the Govt?
Answer:
India is a
Union of States. It is a federal country, and a unitary model of a single-tier
government at national level making all decisions will be a failure, and will
lead to fissiparous tendencies. Therefore conversion of a State into a UT is
regressive. Our pattern always has been converting a UT into a State
wherever necessary/feasible. A new UT has been created either because of a
dispute between States (Chandigarh), or as a transitional measure
(North-east, Goa and Pondicherry after decolonisation, Sikkim after voluntary
merger with India etc. So far there have been no instances of converting a
whole State into UT(s). It is a unitary approach that should be avoided for
reasons stated above. And it is unwise to unilaterally impose a solution
without taking the stakeholders into confidence and hammering out a negotiated
solution. The Union should play a proactive role to reach a solution, but
should not bulldoze. NDA under Mr Vajpayee followed this approach before
bifurcation of UP, Bihar and MP. That is the federally correct and politically
wise approach.
Q. Can you please elaborate on “different model of democratic government”.
Is J&K, a state with internal and external security complications, ready
for it?
Answer:
Obviously
local situations vary in a large and complex country. As long as Union’s
constitutional role under Seventh Schedule is intact, and fundamental
postulates of democratic and accountable government are adhered to, unity and
integrity of India are safe. Union’s meddling in State’s functioning will only
make things more complicated and often worse. Regarding different local
models, there is no reason why Delhi, through constitutional diktat should
decide how the State legislature is elected (our Constitution prescribes an
elaborate model as a complete replica of the Union), local governments are
structured (73rd and 74th Amendments created over structured, underpowered,
largely dysfunctional local governments) or cooperatives are managed(Part 9 B
prescribes elaborate mechanisms to manage a coop; at this rate tomorrow
somebody will incorporate a chapter in the Constitution on how to run a local
club!).
In Kashmir,
earlier the Sadar I Riyasat (Governor) was elected by the legislature. Heavens
won’t fall if the all States elect Governors just as the President is elected,
or if we abolish governors altogether. Until now J&K had a term of six
years for its elected legislature. Every State can be allowed to choose the
manner of election of executive and legislature, and their term of office
within a band, say 3-6 years. There is no reason we should impose by the
federal Constitution an inflexible, one-shoe-fits-all approach. No one person
has the ability or imagination to anticipate all local needs and contingencies
and design a model that fits every situation.
Q. Can we
expect to see these new UTs turning into states in the long-term?
Answer:
I understand
that the HM announced that the creation of UTs is only a temporary measure.
Parliament has the power to convert a UT into a State. The problem is with
conversion of a whole State into UTs. Once we abrogate Article 370, J&K became like
any other State, and we should adopt the same constitutional methods and
practices. We cannot in the same breath argue for full integration of the
State, and at the same time treat it on a different footing; we are actually
weakening integration. There are obvious local challenges because of civic
unrest; they should be handled the way we handle them anywhere else in India.
That is the best guarantor of national integration. Different treatment will
only give fodder to other nations to undermine our sovereignty.
Q. Should India be concerned about the reaction of the international
community (especially Pakistan, US)?
Answer:
We are too
big a nation to worry all the time about other nations. We should do what is
best for our people and our nation. At the same time our own self-interest and global
image should be protected. If we are seen as undemocratic or hypocritical, our
global influence diminishes. Our actions must therefore reflect our values, and
we must take world nations, particularly friendly great powers into confidence,
and lucidly explain our stand and actions to the world. Beyond that we should
not be guided by wishes of other nations.
Q. Your
thoughts on how to resettle Kashmiri Pandits
Answer:
Legally, the
Kashmiri Pandits have all rights and they should be enforced. They have been
violently and brutally driven away from their homelands. It is a disgrace and a
tragedy that we as a nation did very little to protect the Kashmiri Pandits who
are refugees in their own nation. If they go back to their homes, they would have
legitimate concerns about their lives and safety in the midst of hostile
neighbours. There are probably three options: a) if enough groups wish to go
back to their homes and if there is safety in numbers, the government must
provide full assistance to them, and provide full protection to their
communities as long as it is needed. b). if in their homes there is serious
threat to their lives and livelihoods, they must be allowed to choose any
location in J&K where they feel safe, and the government at its cost must
provide full rehabilitation and fully protect those settlements. c) if some
families prefer to permanently settle in other parts of India outside J&K,
government must provide full compensation to them for loss of homes, properties
and livelihood, and give all assistance needed for resettlement.
Q. What is the
way forward for these new UTs?
Answer:
What happens
in the new UTs depends on GoI’s approach to long term solution. The above
answers cover some approaches. But we must not forget Jammu region where there
has been for long a popular demand for separate statehood/autonomy. That needs
to be addressed simultaneously.
The current
situation could provide us an opportunity to strengthen unity, promote local
flexibility and evolve as a mature federal polity. Let us hope a constructive
and healthy debate will facilitate real change for the better.
No comments:
Post a Comment