Friday, March 29, 2024
 
 News Details
Bhim urges Hurriyat Leaders to understand pros & cons of Article 35(A)


Jammu, August 18 (Scoop News)-Prof.Bhim Singh, Chief Patron of National Panthers Party & Executive Chairman of State Legal Aid Committee who has been appearing at different times against the illegal detention of the Hurriyat Conference leaders in the High Court and the Supreme Court has requested them to study the pros and cons of Article 35(A) before attempting to defend this dictatorial and illegal amendment in the Indian Constitution.
Prof.Bhim Singh has made a strong appeal to the Hurriyat Conference leaders to read and understand the implications and effects of this Article on the Fundamental Rights of the Indian citizens (residents of J&K). Prof.Bhim Singh in a strong message pleaded with the Hurriyat Conference leaders to understand the meaning of Article 35 in the Indian Constitution which has prohibited State Legislatures to interfere with the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to all the citizens of India including J&K. Article 35(A) clearly dictates that it is the Parliament alone which has power to make laws in respect of Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Chapter-III of the Indian Constitution mentioned in Article 12 to 35 (Chapter-III). Secondly, it is important to understand that this Chapter-III in the Indian Constitution guarantying Fundamental Rights to all citizens including the Permanent Residents of J&K were fully entitled to share the benefits of the Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution from Article 12 to 35.
The residents of J&K were entitled to the benefits of Fundamental Rights and all the residents of J&K, being citizens of India, were entitled to share the benefits of Fundamental Rights.
It was in 1953 when J&K Prime Minister, Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah was dismissed and put in jail. His detention was challenged by British Advocate Mr. Dingle Foot before the trial court at Jammu on the ground that Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah was entitled and enjoyed all Fundamental Rights guaranteed in the Constitution of India. Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah could not have been kept in detention without trial for more than three months. This was the situation that created an embarrassing situation for Prime Minister, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru. It was for this reason that the Indian Prime Minister wrote a letter to Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the then President of India pleading to ban the application of Fundamental Rights to the Permanent Residents of J&K. It was President of India who under the circumstances issued a Presidential Order empowering J&K State to amend Article 35 in order to keep the citizens of J&K out of the protection cover. ‘A’ was added to 35 making it 35(A). Empowering J&K Govt. to deprive the residents of J&K (citizens of India) of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Chapter-III of the Indian Constitution.
That the Govt. of J&K started to misuse this amendment which continues till this day. This is tragic and sad that the media too started blowing the so-called gains of this dictatorial amendment without application its mind.
That the President of India had power to issue an Ordinance/Presidential Order in respect of J&K under Article 370. But, this subject matter had no relevance with the material mentioned in the Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. The President of India could have issued Ordinance which could not be extended beyond six months unless Parliament of India interfered.
Presidential Order in respect of Article 35 could not have extended beyond six months even though Article 370 was a temporary.
This Article has come for the first time before the Apex Court of India. The Supreme Court has a great role to play. This is important for the Indian citizens in J&K to realize that Article 35(A) has made the people of J&K as subordinate rather slaves under the dictatorship of the State Govt.
This is also important to understand that State Subject granting Permanent Resident status to the citizens of J&K was introduced by Maharaja Hari Singh in 1927 with a minor amendment in 1931. This is also important to understand that this law made by the ruler of J&K was not perturb by the Constituent Assembly of India nor it was disturbed by the Constituent Assembly of J&K. The concept of State Subject during Monarchy was renamed as Permanent Resident Status. This Permanent Resident Status cannot be challenged or changed by even Parliament of India. The State Subjects in J&K are now constitutionally described as ‘Permanent Residents’ of J&K. This status has been saved at various legal formalities. This status of the State Subjects now called ‘Permanent Residents’ has nothing to do with Article 35(A). 35(A) has proved a nail on the heads of all citizens of India, Permanent Residents of the State.
I would like to refer that most of the Hurriyat Conference leaders have been in jail without trial for years. I, too, have spent nearly eight years in the prisons of J&K even when I was a Legislator in the State Assembly. The Indian citizens presently Permanent Residents of J&K have not been given the benefits of the Fundamental Rights. Even today hundreds of young people stand detained in J&K and even outside the State under State Public Safety Act for years. They cannot claim the benefits of Fundamental Rights mentioned in Chapter-III of the Indian Constitution. The day ‘A’ disappears from Article 35. Thousands of young people in illegal detentions in J&K or outside under Public Safety Act, J&K shall get the relief. No person even if he is Permanent Resident of J&K shall be detained beyond three months anywhere in the country without trial. This is unfortunate that neither politicians nor the social activists nor even the hardcore politicians have tried to understand the freedom they have lost because of Article 35(A). 35(A) is illegal, has been illegal since 1955 and has its illegal and unconstitutional existence.
I would like to request all those who are eager to fight this cause on the roads before understanding the consequences of this law to kindly allow an open debate on the Fundamental Rights of all people of J&K and its effect because of the imposed Article 35(A). State Subject what is illegally defined today as Permanent Resident status has nothing to do with the dictatorial and harassing amendment which was introduced in 1954 by the President. Let the Parliament of India answer this question?
Prof.Bhim Singh reminded his Hurriyat friends and others who are supporting 35(A) to imagine and ask themselves as to why all the ex-rulers of J&K including National Conference, PDP etc. are defending Article 35(A) which they have been using as swords against me (Bhim Singh), all justice mongers (including Hurriyat Conference). They are not supporting justice and equity for the people of J&K, they are fighting to retain or regain power to rule which is not possible if the people of J&K shall regain their Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Chapter-III till May 14, 1954. The so-called political parties in Kashmir are fighting to retain their dictatorial power where ‘me and you’ shall have no space to express our opinions with freedom and liberty.
...
Share this Story
 
 
  Comment On this Story
 
 
 Back Issuesk Issues
If you are looking for Issues beyond today. You can simply use this calendar tool to view Issue of Scoop News for any particular Date.
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Scoop News, Jammu Kashmirr
Home || About Us || Advertise With Us || Disclaimer || Contact Us
Powered by Web Design Jammu