Elections before statehood in Jammu & Kashmir: Can a cart pull a horse?

The demand for restoration of statehood before elections is likely to have popular support both in Jammu and in the Kashmir Valley

Image
Bharat Bhushan
6 min read Last Updated : Jun 28 2021 | 7:32 AM IST
The Centre gave no assurance on restoring the statehood of Jammu & Kashmir within a specific timeline when it met with the mainstream political parties from the Union Territory (UT). Delhi appeared to be keener on fresh delimitation of constituencies and elections within the UT framework. After the meeting, the National Conference demanded that statehood of J&K be restored before Assembly elections are held. The sequencing of the proposed delimitation, elections and statehood, it would seem, is the crux of restarting the democratic process in J&K.
 
Two questions provide clues to the Centre’s intent: Why is the delimitation process felt to be necessary before the J&K Assembly elections? And, why is statehood being pushed to after the Assembly elections? 
 
The notification for a delimitation exercise for J&K, Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland was done on March 20, 2020. It was to be carried out by the Delimitation Commission chaired by Justice (Retd) Ranjana Prakash Desai. However, in March 2021, the Centre took the four northeastern states out of mandate of the Delimitation Commission. The Assam state Assembly elections were held on March 27, 2021 without delimitation. Presumably, the delimitation in the northeastern states will now be held with the rest of the country in 2026 based on the 2021 Census.
 
Then why is delimitation in J&K being proposed much before it takes place in the rest of the country, and relying on outdated figures from the 2011 Census? The J&K Reorganisation Act, which led to the bifurcation of the erstwhile state, provided for seven extra constituencies for the Union Territory of J&K. If the reorganisation of the UT is to be completed, the new constituencies will have to be demarcated now. But should they be defined on population data more than 10 years old? There are other concerns too about the delimitation exercise.
 
As of now, of the 83 Assembly constituencies that go to polls, 46 are in the Kashmir Valley and 37 in Jammu (24 seats are reserved for Pakistan Occupied Kashmir). The apprehension among the Kashmiris is that delimitation is being done to add seven extra seats to the Jammu region. Prima facie, the 2011 Census figures do not seem to support a reallocation that entirely favours Jammu. Yet, the Kashmiris fear such a manipulation, given the Centre’s deceptive behaviour in the run-up to the August 5, 2019, decision to strike down statehood, remove its special status and bifurcate it.
 
The non-BJP parties in J&K are unlikely to compromise on the issue of statehood before elections. In the all-party meeting with the prime minister, at least two leaders – Farooq Abdullah of the National Conference and Ghulam Nabi Azad of the Congress party – put their foot down and argued that statehood would have to be restored before elections. Kashmiri leaders feel that holding Assembly elections while J&K remains a UT may eventually lead to a truncated statehood like that of Delhi – where the elected executive is maimed. Ghulam Nabi Azad made these fears clear by telling the prime minister that none of the parties wanted an “LG State” (i.e. a state run by the Lieutenant Governor) in J&K.
 
A statehood like Delhi’s would mean that framing any legislation on land, public order and police would remain with the Centre. Further, all executive actions initiated by the Cabinet or ministers would need the approval of the Lieutenant Governor. This truncation of elected power was achieved in Delhi through an amendment to the Greater National Capital Territory of Delhi Act; in J&K it could be achieved by amending the J&K Reorganisation Act of 2019.
 
A truncated statehood will not be acceptable to most of the mainstream political parties, especially the five-party Peoples’ Alliance for Gupkar Declaration. The proposal’s acceptance by a couple of smaller and pliable parties will not pass international muster as a milestone in the road map for restoring the political process in J&K.
 
The optics and the packaging of the Centre’s move on J&K is very much aimed at an international audience. If the ground situation were indeed normal and suited to revive the political process, then the Amarnath Yatra would not have been cancelled for a third year running. Nor would political prisoners remain jailed, media harassed, and security presence heavy in the cities, towns and villages of the Kashmir Valley.
 
The participants in the meeting were aware that the proposed electoral exercise was not for their benefit. One of them pointed this out to the prime minister, observing that as a “frontier state” the situation in J&K was being shaped by developments in Afghanistan, the tension with Pakistan, and the border incursions by China.
 
If the BJP government in Delhi only wants to gain greater regional and international manoeuvrability by claiming forward political movement in J&K, there is no reason why the Kashmiri political parties should oblige by cheerleading its moves. If the National Conference, the Peoples’ Democratic Party and the Congress refuse to contest elections to a UT Assembly, the exercise will lack credibility, and point to a failure of the Centre’s dialogue process. It will not help the Centre to refurbish its image in the eyes of the world or help stabilise ties with Pakistan.
 
The demand for restoration of statehood before elections is likely to have popular support both in Jammu and in the Kashmir Valley. Even if it does not resolve long-standing political issues, at least people would be freed from the clutches of an unaccountable bureaucracy. Statehood would also give them an effective platform to negotiate power sharing with the Centre. Their agenda for greater political, cultural and social autonomy within the Indian Union can be pursued thereafter in a constitutional way. Those with a separatist ideology and favouring militant methods will stay out of it but political parties committed to staying within the Indian Union will be persuaded to put their weight behind pulling J&K out of the morass in which it finds itself.

One subscription. Two world-class reads.

Already subscribed? Log in

Subscribe to read the full story →
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper

Topics :Gupkar DeclarationJammu and KashmirJammu and Kashmir politicsNational ConferenceFarooq AbdullahGhulam Nabi AzadNarendra ModiModi govtAssembly elections

Next Story