by Shah Khalid 14 December 2023
The recent decision by the Indian Supreme Court to uphold the revocation of special status for Jammu and Kashmir has raised concerns about potential violations of the rights of Kashmiris. The abrogation of Article 370, which granted significant autonomy to the region, has not only reshaped the administrative landscape but has also intensified scrutiny on human rights implications. Critics argue that the move by the ruling Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) may contribute to the marginalization of Kashmir’s Muslim-majority population. The decision to direct the region to hold local elections by September 30 next year adds another layer of complexity to an already sensitive issue. As debates on the constitutional validity of the decision persist, the focus on safeguarding the rights and well-being of Kashmiris remains a crucial aspect of the ongoing discourse.
The backdrop to this legal battle dates back to 2019 when Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, in a bold move, abrogated Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which granted significant autonomy to the contested Jammu and Kashmir region. The region had enjoyed this autonomy since the aftermath of the first India-Pakistan war over the Himalayan region in 1947. However, Modi’s government argued that Article 370 was always intended to be temporary and justified the revocation as a necessary step for the region’s development.
Since August of this year, India’s top court has been immersed in hearing a series of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the abrogation. On Monday, a panel of five judges delivered a unanimous decision, affirming Modi’s move and emphasizing the temporary nature of the special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud underscored the historical context, stating that Article 370 was an interim arrangement due to war conditions in the state. The ruling party’s narrative aligns with this perspective, emphasizing that the special status was always meant to be a temporary provision. However, the ground realities say something else, and the decision usurp the rights of thousands of Kashmiris.
The region of Jammu and Kashmir has been at the center of over 75 years of animosity between India and Pakistan, stemming from their independence in 1947. The abrogation of Article 370, which formed the basis for the region’s accession to the Indian union, marked a significant shift that resented thousands of Kashmiris. The move divided the region into two federal territories – Ladakh and Jammu-Kashmir – both directly ruled by the central government, eliminating the need for a regional legislature.
Ajai Shukla, a defense analyst in New Delhi, views the abrogation as a political maneuver aimed at appeasing the Hindu-majority electorate in India. He points to a polarization within the ruling party, which sees anti-Muslim sentiments as a means to consolidate political support. Shukla argues that for the government, fulfilling the promise of revoking Article 370 is a strategic move. Prime Minister Modi, in response to Monday’s ruling, hailed it as “a beacon of hope, a promise of a brighter future.” The Indian Premier took to social media to express his optimism, framing the decision as a resounding declaration of hope, progress, and unity for the people in Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh.
However, political parties in Kashmir, which opposed the revocation and were among those challenging it in court, expressed disappointment. Omar Abdullah, former chief minister and vice president of the Jammu & Kashmir National Conference party acknowledged the setback but affirmed a continued struggle. “Disappointed but not disheartened,” he posted, emphasizing their preparedness for the long haul.
In the wake of this Supreme Court decision, India contends with transformative shifts in the political terrain of the region. Monitoring the implications for the fragile equilibrium of power, historical tensions, and regional stability becomes paramount. The revocation of Article 370 not only reconfigures the administrative framework of Jammu and Kashmir but also exacerbates pre-existing fault lines, requiring a nuanced strategy to navigate the intricate dynamics of this unfolding scenario. Above all, the Kashmiri population finds itself stripped of fundamental rights and the special status it had enjoyed since 1947.
Shah Khalid is a Peshawar-based columnist focusing on power politics in South Asia.