| News Details |
| An open letter to Dr. Karan Singh | |
K B Jandial
Maharaja Sahib,
At the outset, I, like many Jammuites, think that during your public life spread over six and half decades, you witnessed historic events relating to J&K; held high constitutional, political and diplomatic positions; acquired high intellectual fervor & scholarly attributes; linguistic wizard having knowledge of many languages especially Dogri, Hindi, Sanskrit, English; understanding of Hinduism, Indian culture and ethos, scriptures and above all, impeccable integrity and as such qualify to be the President of India long back. Had it happened, it would have made Jammu, albeit, J&K proud. And in your sweet & mesmerizing eloquence and pleasing personality, you personify the true Dogra.
Maharaja Sahib, despite your considered decision to “migrate” to New Delhi by “deserting” the land of Dogra and neglected Jammu all through, your roots continue to be in Jammu. Your willful absence in Jammu created a huge political vacuum that exist even today, which prompted Mehbooba Mufti to say, and rightly so, that “unlike Kashmir, Jammu did not get a proper leadership to meet the aspirations of the people”.
Being the last Maharaja of the State, your concern for people of all parts of J&K is justified and continuous blood-spilling unrest in Kashmir worries you as much as to every Indian. But still people treat you Dogra first and everything else later.
During Kashmir debate in Rajya Sabha on August 10, 2016 everybody within the House and in J&K heard you with rapt attention which you deserved. With due respect and without malice, I am among many who feel you disappointed Jammu and on the contrary first timers- Shamsher Singh Manhas and Jitender Singh , got big applause. I think you spoke some facts that were factually incorrect and also against India’s stated policy which you must had professed when in constitutional positions. I am afraid I may be accused of quoting you out of context but the general impression one gets after hearing you and others, was that you made some critical settled issues “wide open” that raised doubts about their finality, coming from Kashmir’s former Maharaja.
Sir, your eloquence apart, the sum total of your speech was somewhat akin to Kashmir centric politicians; forgive me for saying, in some way even to separatists. Despite your acceptance that J&K is an integral part of India, you choose to add some fault lines that dilute the earlier assertions like you said, “It is an integral part, but what exactly the relation will be… (you didn’t end there but floated an idea to azadi loving Kashmiris) …in many federal countries it varies…even China has one state, two systems…Hong Kong has a different system.” You want to loosen J&K ties with India.
You have repeatedly hinted your misgivings on J&K’s relationship with India and at one stage you came out unmistakably when said, “There is still an uncertainty with regard to exact status of J&K and its relation with the Indian Union.” At another stage you said, “So, integral part doesn’t necessarily mean it will be exactly same as everything else. So, this is an unresolved matter”. That is what most of the Kashmiris say including SAS Geelani except that he says openly to secede from India.
In the course of your speech, you created doubt in the minds of Indian people that J&K relationship with India is not settled, Government claims notwithstanding, and strengthened the skepticism of Kashmiris on their being a part of India.
Sir, you laboured hard to talk about accession that your revered father, Maharaja Hari Singh did with India on 27th October, 1947, and said that he “acceded for three subjects only-defence, communication and foreign affairs”. Yes, it is an undeniable fact. You added that, “all others states subsequently merged but J&K did not merge with India. This too is correct.
But you did not talk about the integration that is taking place quietly, if not on emotional plain, but through democratic and administrative structures, educational and professional pursuits and above all values and culture. Merger is in respect of land but integration is more than land.
You were right when you said, “J&K’s relationship with rest of India is guided by Article 370 and the State Constitution”. You mentioned special status to J&K and other developments like Delhi Agreement of 1952, adoption of State Constitution, “plethora of Presidential Orders which gradually applied increasing number of entries into it.” Sir, are you worried about these Presidential Orders that gave us the same rights as are enjoyed by other Indians? Remember, J&K people got fundamental rights, of course with some modifications, in 1954 and before.
Sir, since you signed J&K Constitution, there should not have been any reason for an ordinary citizen to “educate” a luminary like you, that J&K is an integral part of India and its relationship with India are well defined and irrevocably settled. Dr. Jitender Singh did read out to you the preamble of State Constitution which declares J&K is an integral part of India. What he didn’t tell you two relevant sections. Defining State’s relationship, Section 3 says, “J&K is and shall be integral part of the Union of India.” This relationship has been conclusively settled (at least for those who consider themselves as Indian) in section 147 that debars the State Legislature from amending this relationship. Why were you not sure about J&K’s relationship?
You talked about “uncertainty with regard to exact status of J&K and its relation with the Indian Union”. Sir, Articles 1 and 370 clearly define State’s status in Union of India. According to Article 1, J&K is one of the States (listed at No 15 in the First Schedule) that make India a Union of States. The Indian Constitution has no provision for secession of any part of its territory. So, there should not have been any confusion about the status of J&K in India and its relationship with India that stands settled by section 3 of J&K Constitution.
Article 370 is a comprehensive provision that grants special position to J&K, often called autonomy. Its sub section 1 (b) (i) restricts Parliament’s legislative powers in respect of J&K to “matters specified in the Instrument of Accession”. This is what you have said about three subjects in your speech. But the problem is that everyone, including our lawmakers, thinks that article 370 is only this much. But this is not so.
Its sub section (1) (b) (ii) permits the Parliament to make laws for J&K in respect of “such other matters” in Union and concurrent lists ‘ with the concurrence of the Government of the State, the President may by order specify”.
Another provision of article 370 i.e. sub section (1) (d) says, “such other provisions of the Constitution shall apply” to J&K ,with the concurrence of the Govt, subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify.
You like many others feel that autonomy has been eroded after 1953 that reflects ignorance about article 370 even though it is much talked about. This article which Dr. Ambedkar had declined to draft or pilot it in the national constituent assembly was drafted in consultation with Sheikh Abdullah. Whatever “plethora of Presidential orders issued to extend other entries (provisions) of the Constitution” or other laws to J&K were only after meeting the requirements of Article 370 i.e. after obtaining concurrence of the State Govt. of the day. This, in fact, demolishes the argument of erosion of autonomy mostly aired by ignorant leaders who also attribute this erosion as one of the factors of Kashmir unrest.
Sir, you embarrassingly told the nation that Kashmir is not India’s internal matter. “First, we ‘insist’ J&K is an internal affair. ….there is a “major international” aspect to it. You said there are Pakistan and China. “India bluntly says it is an internal matter. We have to realize what it means.” You tried to demolish India’s well known stand that it is at best bilateral issue and not international matter. This is what separatists (now even mainstream politicians say) and their mentor- Pakistan have been saying at international forum.
Sir, Pakistan illegally occupied part of J&K territory in 1947 and in March 1963 “gifted” away over 5182sq. km of it to China. Why nobody, not even separatists, made it a big issue as Pakistan had no right to cede J&K territory to any other country? Nobody has any answer but you insist India should continue dialogue with them. There is no international dimension to it even though it has become bi-lateral issue after Shimla Agreement. When there is no consensus even on agenda, how can dialogue start, even if you overlook insults heaped on India and its Ministers and continue to bleed?
Yes, bloodshed in Kashmir must end. Why politicians, when out of power, tend to vitiate the already surcharged atmosphere by raking up issues that fuel fire. You asked, “Why is psyche of Kashmir so deeply hurt and so deeply mollified that they are prepared to take this destructive path”? Who else is better placed than you to answer this question, sir? Surprisingly, you didn’t counsel the teenaged rioters or patharbaaz to stop storming security camps, snatching rifles and attacking conveys and let their elders explore ways to assuage their “hurt psyche”.
Glad that you picked up the speech of Shamsher Singh and also lend support to “Jammuiyat” and “Ladakhiyat,” two strong stakeholders in Kashmir issue which always played its matured and tranquil role in every situation despite being leaderless.
Forgive me for being candid and blunt.
A humble citizen of Jammu.
(The writer is former Secretary Information, health, transport, CAPD departments and a member of Public Service Commission, feedback: [email protected])
(Disclaimer: The views, observations and opinions expressed in above write up of Scoop News are strictly author's own. Scoop News does not take any onus or liability for the veracity, accuracy, validity, completeness, suitability of any of information in the above given write up. The information, facts or figures appearing in the write up in no way manifest the position, standpoint or stance of Scoop News and the Scoop News does not assume any encumbrance or answerability of the same.)
Editor
Scoop News,(scoopnews.in)
... |
| |
|
|
Share this Story |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|