Thursday, May 19, 2022
UniqPaid - online rewards program

Article 370: What happened with Kashmir and why it matters

India’s BJP-led government is hailing its decision to strip the state of Jammu and Kashmir of autonomy after seven decades, characterising it as the correction of a “historical blunder”. The BBC’s Geeta Pandey in Delhi explains why this has happened and why it’s important.

Why is Kashmir controversial?

Kashmir is a Himalayan region that both India and Pakistan say is fully theirs. The area was once a princely state called Jammu and Kashmir, but it joined India in 1947 when the sub-continent was divided up at the end of British rule.

India and Pakistan subsequently went to war over it and each came to control different parts of the territory with a ceasefire line agreed. There has been violence in the Indian-administered side – the state of Jammu and Kashmir – for 30 years due to a separatist insurgency against Indian rule.

What’s happened now?

In the first few days of August, there were signs of something afoot in Kashmir. 

Tens of thousands of additional Indian troops were deployed, a major Hindu pilgrimage was cancelled, schools and colleges were shut, tourists were ordered to leave, telephone and internet services were suspended and regional political leaders were placed under house arrest.

But most of the speculation was that Article 35A of the Indian constitution, which gave some special privileges to the people of the state, would be scrapped.

The government then stunned everyone by saying it was revoking nearly all of Article 370, which 35A is part of and which has been the basis of Kashmir’s complex relationship with India for some 70 years.

Kashmir map

How significant is Article 370?

The article allowed the state a certain amount of autonomy – its own constitution, a separate flag and freedom to make laws. Foreign affairs, defence and communications remained the preserve of the central government.

As a result, Jammu and Kashmir could make its own rules relating to permanent residency, ownership of property and fundamental rights. It could also bar Indians from outside the state from purchasing property or settling there.

The constitutional provision has underpinned India’s often fraught relationship with Kashmir, the only Muslim-majority region to join India at partition.

Why did the government do it?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party had long opposed Article 370 and revoking it was in the party’s 2019 election manifesto.

They argued it needed to be scrapped to integrate Kashmir and put it on the same footing as the rest of India. After returning to power with a massive mandate in the April-May general elections, the government lost no time in acting on its pledge.

Critics of Monday’s move are linking it to the economic slowdown that India is currently facing – they say it provides a much-needed diversion for the government.

Kashmiri protesters clash with government forces in Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir in 2018.
Image captionIndia has had a fraught relationship with Kashmir for decades

Many Kashmiris believe that the BJP ultimately wants to change the demographic character of the Muslim-majority region by allowing non-Kashmiris to buy land there.

Although Home Minister Amit Shah’s announcement in parliament on Monday came as a surprise to most Indians, it would have taken the government some preparation to arrive at the decision.

The move also fits in with Mr Modi’s desire to show that the BJP is tough on Kashmir, and Pakistan.

What’s changed on the ground?

Kashmir will no longer have a separate constitution but will have to abide by the Indian constitution much like any other state. All Indian laws will be automatically applicable to Kashmiris, and people from outside the state will be able to buy property there.

The government says this will bring development to the region.

Members of Hindu Sena, a rightwing group, celebrate after the abolition of Article 370 in Delhi
Image captionHindu rightwing groups have welcomed the move

“I want to tell the people of Jammu and Kashmir what damage Articles 370 and 35A did to the state,” Mr Shah told parliament. “It’s because of these sections that democracy was never fully implemented, corruption increased in the state, that no development could take place.”

The government is also moving to break up the state into two smaller, federally administered territories. One region will combine Muslim-majority Kashmir and Hindu-majority Jammu. The other is Buddhist-majority Ladakh, which is culturally and historically close to Tibet.

P Chidambaram, a senior leader in the opposition Congress Party described the decision as a “catastrophic step” and warned in parliament that it could have serious consequences.

“You may think you have scored a victory, but you are wrong and history will prove you to be wrong. Future generations will realise what a grave mistake this house is making today,” he said.

Media captionWhy did 2018 see more violence in Indian-administered Kashmir?

Is this all legal?

According to the constitution, Article 370 could only be modified with the agreement of the “state government”. But there hasn’t been much of a state government in Jammu and Kashmir for over a year now.

In June last year, India imposed federal rule after the government of the then chief minister, Mehbooba Mufti, was reduced to a minority. This meant the federal government only had to seek the consent of the governor who imposes its rule.

The government says it is well within its rights to bring in the changes and that similar decisions have been taken by federal governments in the past.

But expert opinion is sharply divided.

One constitutional expert, Subhash Kashyap, told news agency ANI that the order was “constitutionally sound” and that “no legal and constitutional fault can be found in it”.

However another constitutional expert, AG Noorani, told BBC Hindi it was “an illegal decision, akin to committing fraud” that could be challenged in the Supreme Court.

Opposition political parties could launch a legal challenge but Kashmir is an emotive issue with many Indians, and most parties would be wary of opposing the move lest they be branded anti-India. That could leave any challenge up to individuals or activists.

Source: BBC News

More from author

Best Fifa Football Awards 2019: Liverpool trio nominated for men’s award

Liverpool trio Virgil van Dijk, Sadio Mane and Mohamed Salah and Tottenham's Harry Kane are in the...

‘Pack children’s medicines in your hand luggage’

Medications for children should be placed in hand luggage on a flight in case they become ill...

Romania police chief sacked after teen ‘killed by kidnapper’

Romania's interior minister has fired the chief of police after the murder of a teenage girl whose...

Pirate our games, don’t buy them from key resellers, say indies

Small video games studios are asking the public to stop buying their titles from "unauthorized" markets, saying...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trends Now





Getaway to the Sahara? How In 2022 can be your chance

Getaway to the Sahara A getaway to the Sahara. Consider the Sahara, Ouarzazate as your next trip destination, the traditional Moroccan cuisine, which visitors love...

Boris Johnson postpones White House visit

Boris Johnson postponed a White House visit planned for next week after a furious phone call during which President Trump accused the British prime...

How Mitch McConnell Delivered Acquittal for president Donald Trump

“We can be smart or we can be stupid,” Mr. McConnell warned his rank and file during a closed-door lunch of halibut, fried chicken...

African Champions League: Esperance declared winners

Tunisian club Esperance have been declared African Champions League winners after opponents Wydad Casablanca were found guilty of abandoning the second leg of the...
%d bloggers like this: