Ladakh's Article 371(K) proposal: What it means and how it could work

As talks between the Centre and Ladakh's representatives remain unresolved, here's how Article 371(K) could offer constitutional safeguards and how similar provisions work in other states

The proposed constitutional safeguards for Ladakh remain unresolved after a meeting between the Union Home Ministry and representatives of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), scheduled for October 22, did not take place. The two sides had exchanged draft proposals at a meeting in Leh on October 15 but failed to reach an agreement over the proposed governance structure.

 

The discussions centre on a proposed constitutional provision, referred to as Article 371(K), and an elected body for the Union Territory. While the Centre has offered a special constitutional arrangement, representatives of LAB and KDA have sought a body with clearly defined legislative, executive and financial powers.

 

 

Let's understand what Article 371(K) would mean for Ladakh, how it would differ from the Sixth Schedule protections sought by the representatives, and what existing constitutional arrangements in other states tell us about its possible scope.

What is Article 371(K), and what is Ladakh seeking?

Article 371(K) is the proposed provision to establish a special governance arrangement for the region. The idea is to give the region a formal role in decisions affecting its land, cultural identity, language and natural resources.

 

Unlike ordinary administrative arrangements, a provision in the Constitution could give these protections a stronger legal mandate.

 

At this stage, Article 371(K) remains under discussion and there is no draft yet.

 

Since Ladakh became a Union Territory without a legislature in 2019, its administration has operated under a different structure from that of Jammu and Kashmir, which has an elected legislature. Ladakh currently has two elected Autonomous Hill Development Councils, in Leh and Kargil, but these do not exercise the powers of a full legislature.

 

The LAB and KDA have sought constitutional safeguards for land, employment, culture and natural resources, along with greater democratic control over the region’s administration. Their demands have included statehood and inclusion under the Constitution’s Sixth Schedule.

Why the demand for inclusion under Sixth Schedule?

The Sixth Schedule, read with Article 244(2), provides for autonomous district and regional councils in specified tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. These councils exercise defined legislative, administrative and financial powers over certain local matters.

 

Ladakh's demand for inclusion under this framework reflects the search for constitutional safeguards for its predominantly tribal population and distinct cultural identity.

 

The proposed Article 371(K) arrangement would follow a different route. Instead of automatically extending the Sixth Schedule, it would create a Ladakh-specific framework whose powers would depend on the final constitutional text.

 

The existing hill councils also make the institutional design important. The Leh and Kargil councils operate under the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils Act, 1997. The new arrangement would need to clarify which responsibilities remain with these councils and which move to the proposed Union Territory-level body.

How does Article 371 provide special constitutional protection?

Article 371 and Articles 371A to 371J contain special provisions for particular states and regions. These provisions address different needs, including regional development, customary practices, land rights, education and public employment. The main intent to add this provision in the constitutional framework of India is to safeguard the rights of the backward and tribal populations without hindering their way of life and their customary practices while maintaining the majority mainstream practices.

 

For example, Article 371 provides for development boards in Maharashtra and Gujarat, with provisions concerning regional development expenditure and opportunities in education and vocational training. Article 371J provides special arrangements for the Kalyana Karnataka region, including a development board and provisions relating to education and public employment.

 

Other provisions protect distinct interests. Under Article 371A, certain parliamentary laws concerning Naga religious and social practices, customary law and procedure, customary justice, and ownership and transfer of land and its resources do not apply to Nagaland unless its Legislative Assembly decides otherwise, subject to the article's terms.

 

Article 371G provides specified protections for Mizoram concerning customary practices, customary law and justice, and land ownership and transfer.

 

These examples show that special constitutional provisions do not follow a uniform model. Their legal effect depends on the rights and powers expressly written into each article. A provision focused on regional development, for instance, does not automatically provide the same protections as one dealing with land and customary law.

How can the proposed provision become law?

Introducing a new Article 371(K) would require a constitutional amendment under Article 368. The amendment would need to meet the applicable parliamentary voting requirements. Whether ratification by state legislatures would also be necessary would depend on the provisions being amended.

 

Any implementing law or regulation would have to operate within the resulting constitutional framework. Article 240, which empowers the President to make regulations for specified Union Territories, does not currently include Ladakh in its list. Its relevance to the proposed model would therefore depend on the final legal design and any required constitutional changes as per the latest proposed framework dated October 19.