A Heated Assembly Debate: The Struggle Over Article 370 Restoration in Jammu and Kashmir

The Struggle Over Restoration of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir.

On November 7, 2024, a fierce dispute erupted in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly, capturing the attention of the public and reflecting the region’s ongoing struggle for political identity and autonomy. The altercation began when Sheikh Khursheed, brother of Member of Parliament Engineer Rashid, displayed a banner demanding the restoration of Article 370 and the release of political prisoners. This bold act led to a physical clash involving members from different political parties, each with varying views on the future of Jammu and Kashmir. The heated environment within the Assembly underscored the complexity of the issues surrounding Article 370, a provision that once granted special autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, and the significant challenges that lie ahead in addressing these demands.

What is Article 370?

Article 370 of the Indian Constitution was introduced to provide special status to Jammu and Kashmir. This unique status allowed the state to have its own constitution, separate laws, and a considerable degree of autonomy, particularly in matters related to residency, property ownership, and government employment. This arrangement was meant to recognise Jammu and Kashmir’s distinct identity and safeguard its political autonomy while keeping it within the Indian Union. However, on August 5, 2019, this special status was abrogated by the Indian government, effectively removing the state’s autonomy and reorganising it into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir, with a legislative assembly, and Ladakh, without one​​.

The Controversy and Call for Restoration

The decision to revoke Article 370 sparked intense political and emotional reactions across Jammu and Kashmir. Many residents and political leaders saw the removal of Article 370 as a loss of identity and autonomy, stirring feelings of resentment and a sense of betrayal. Political parties in Jammu and Kashmir, such as the National Conference (NC) and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), along with independent legislators like Engineer Rashid and his supporters, have continuously voiced their opposition to this change. They argue that the special status was an essential part of Jammu and Kashmir’s unique identity within the Indian Union and that its removal has left the region without adequate representation or protection for its distinct culture​​.

The Assembly Scuffle: A Reflection of Political Division

The recent scuffle in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly is a physical manifestation of the divided opinions on this issue. During the Assembly session, Sheikh Khursheed’s act of displaying a banner calling for the restoration of Article 370 was met with hostility from members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who view the abrogation as a positive step towards integrating Jammu and Kashmir fully into India. When BJP members tried to seize the banner, other legislators, including Sajad Lone and Waheed Para, came to Khursheed’s support, leading to a confrontation that required the intervention of security personnel and resulted in the expulsion of three MLAs from the Assembly hall. This incident highlights the strong emotions tied to the issue of Article 370 and the difficulty in reaching a consensus on the region’s political future​.

The Legal Challenges to Restoring Article 370

Restoring Article 370 is not merely a matter of political will; it involves significant legal and constitutional obstacles. According to the Supreme Court of India, Article 370 was originally intended as a temporary provision, and its abrogation was seen as a final step in integrating Jammu and Kashmir into India. The Court upheld the government’s decision in 2019, stating that the removal of Article 370 aligned with the constitutional goal of integrating the region. This decision established a strong legal precedent, making it highly unlikely for future courts to reverse the ruling. Additionally, any attempt to restore Article 370 would require a constitutional amendment, demanding a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament—an extremely difficult achievement in India’s current political landscape​​​.

Political Reality and the Promise of Statehood

In recent years, there has been a shift in focus from restoring Article 370 to regaining statehood for Jammu and Kashmir. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have expressed their commitment to restoring Jammu and Kashmir’s status as a state, though without the special autonomy previously provided under Article 370. This shift reflects the political reality that restoring Article 370 may not be achievable in the foreseeable future. Many political leaders, including Ghulam Nabi Azad, have urged people to focus on development and progress rather than on promises of autonomy that may be difficult to fulfil​.

Changing Public Sentiment and Priorities

The demand for the restoration of Article 370 continues to hold emotional significance for many people in Jammu and Kashmir. However, public sentiment has also started to shift toward other priorities, such as development, employment, and infrastructure. The abrogation of Article 370 has been framed by the government as a step toward long-term stability and integration, leading to changes in how people view the region’s future. For some, the focus has turned to practical concerns, such as improving living conditions and economic opportunities, while others continue to advocate for political autonomy. This division in priorities reflects the complex and evolving attitudes toward the issue of Article 370 within Jammu and Kashmir and across India​.

The Political Strategy and False Hope

The ongoing promises by local parties to restore Article 370 have also been criticised as a political strategy to gain support in elections. By appealing to voters’ emotions, some political leaders are accused of creating a false sense of hope among the people of Jammu and Kashmir. While these promises resonate with those who feel a strong connection to the region’s unique identity, they are often seen as unrealistic given the significant legal and political obstacles. Critics argue that focusing on more achievable goals, such as the restoration of statehood and improving local governance, would better serve the people of Jammu and Kashmir than making promises that are unlikely to be fulfilled​.

Conclusion

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel for more Valuable Content – TheStudyias

Download the App to Subscribe to our Courses – Thestudyias