The person who wrote this Article – Paying The Price For Article 370 is blindly following what he has picked from the views and opinion of “RUMORS”. He is ILL INFORMED about the Facts of the history of J&K.
Never ever had Kashmir the population of Kashmiri pundits more than 1.5 to 2 Lakhs, which means never has the Percentage crossed 2-3% of Entire Valley.Secondly, Article 370 is not entitled to Valley only, it’s applicable to entire J&K. So he is wrong again.
Thirdly, About the Situation when INC had 2/3rd majority in LS & RS; It could not have done anything then and it cannot do anything now because of the following.
Facts which Indians need to know about Article 370 of the Indian Constitution:
(1) Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir.Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,-
(a) The provisions of article 238 shall not apply in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir;
(b) The power of Parliament to make laws for the said State shall be limited to–
(i) those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List
which, in consultation with the Government of the State, are declared by the President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of Accession governing the accession of the State to the ominion of India as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for that State and
(ii)such other matters in the said Lists as, with the concurrence of the Government of the State, the President may by order specify. Explanation.- For the purposes of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognized by the President as the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers for the time being in office under the Maharaja’s Proclamation dated the fifth day of March, 1948;
(c) the provisions of article 1 and of this article shall apply in relation to that State;
(d) such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify :
Provided that no such order which relates to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph
(i) of sub-clause
(b) shall be issued except in consultati on with the Government of the State:
Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred to in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of that Government.
(2) If the concurrence of the Government of the State referred to in paragraph (ii) of sub-clause (b) of clause (1) or in the second proviso to sub-clause
(d) of that clause be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing the Constitution of the State is convened, it shall be placed before s uch Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.
(3) Not withstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify:
Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification. In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 370 the President, on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, declared that as from the 17th Day of November, 1952, the said Article 370 shall be operative with the modification that for the Explanation in Cl. (1) thereof, the following explanation is substituted namely. “Explanation – For the purpose of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognized by the President on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly of the State as the Sad r-i-Riyasat (now Governor) of Jammu and Kashmir, acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers of the State for the time being in office.”
(Ministry of Law order No. C. O. dated 15th Nov. 1952.) As far as migration of K pundits is considered, I shall put up an open question to all readers “Is it possible for a minority community who are scattered all around any state in India to migrate to another state or province in ONE NIGHT? One night, yes One Night. How come KP’s migrated to Jammu on 21st and 22nd night of March 1990 during Jagmohan as Governor and later he resigned on 25th May 1990 and G. C. Saxena taking over.” Ask Kashmiri Pundits who made them to migrate and what was the motive? I answer to this; there were Unprecedented Hindu-Sikh riots in Jammu city on the birthday of Guru Gobind Singh on 13th Jan 1989, when Pundits left from Kashmir remaining were Sikhs and Muslims. Kill them and finish the case as Jagmohan did on 21st May 1990 first Assassinating Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq and later killing more than Thousand Mourners by Firing at them at two ends of the bridge.
Indian agencies failed in their attempt. KP’s left from Kashmir in order to come back and rule again on Majority like they have done more than five times in history. This time they failed. It’s an Old saying in Kashmir “Shaall Chalet Bathen Lori” simply “Crocodile Tears”. More than 100,000 Muslims have been slaughtered/Killed by Indian Agencies and hardly few of them not amounting to ONE HUNDRED are Hindus who have been targeted by Muslims or the Militants.
The Kashmir problem is yet another example of the failure of the UN in resolving a serious conflict. For the last 60 years Kashmir has been like a festering wound on the body of the Indian subcontinent where more than 1/5 of humanity lives. Three and a “half” wars have been fought between India and Pakistan over Kashmir during the second half of the last century. Now both these countries have become “nuclear powers” and they are again on the threshold of yet another conflict.
Ved Bhasin, a veteran media person and chairperson of Kashmir Times, in an online interview to a Kashmiri website. “The Maharaja asked India and Pakistan to sign a standstill agreement that the present arrangement would continue till he was able to decide which state he’d like to join. Pakistan accepted. But India refused and asked him to decide. Obviously they wanted him to announce his accession to India, as they thought he was a Hindu ruler… double standards… In the case of the Nizam of Hyderabad, they said people [majority were Hindu] would decide. In the case of J&K, they said the ruler [majority subjects were Muslim] will decide.”
Many Indians say that Kashmir legally became an integral part of India when the maharaja of the state signed the instrument of accession. Alas, such legalisms become irrelevant when ground realities change. Indian kings and princes, including the Mughals, acceded to the British Raj. The documents they signed became irrelevant when Indians launched an independence movement.
Many Indians point to long episodes of peace in the Valley and say the separatists are just a noisy minority. But the British Raj also had long quiet periods between Gandhian agitations, which involved just a few lakhs of India’s 500 million people then.
One lakh people joined the Quit India movement of 1942, but 25 lakh others joined the British Indian army to fight for the Empire’s glory. Blimps cited this as evid ence that most Indians simply wanted jobs and a decent life. The British Raj built the biggest railway and canal networks in the world. It said most Indians were satisfied with economic development, and that independence was demanded by a noisy minority. This is uncomfortably similar to the official Indian response to the Kashmiri demand for Azaadi.
The misconceptions about history can be corrected by acknowledging the history of resentment, says Nitya Ramakrishnan, a lawyer who has represented many Kashmiri Muslims in court. The problem, she says, was that we have started to see security and rights as a binary when they should go together. “No one is questioning the police’s power to arrest but even when the police know they have picked the wrong guy, they still go ahead with prosecution,” she says.
To conclude with…
Is it just, fair and practical to demand oath of allegiance to the constitution of India, when the whole nation of Kashmir is fighting and laying down lives for the demilitarization of Kashmir for the last so many years. Where is the writ of the Indian-sponsored rulers and the Pro-Independence Leaders in Kashmir? Who is ruling over Kashmir—the rifle holder soldier in a bunker, a Militant or a so called leader of the Assembly or a Hurriyat Leader?
The Indian soldier and Policeman armed with sophisticated weapons committing heinous crimes delivers, sermons on polling, democracy and morality, and the helpless and innocent inhabitants are asked to vote and not to vote for loyal puppies of the Indian regime in Kashmir. Treachery and tyranny—another name is shame. But here again, what a common man will do? Abide with the gun on his head or listen to the leaders who hail themselves as messiah.
Maharaja Gulab Singh assumed sovereign rights, over Kashmir as enshrined in Article 4 and 12 of Lahore treaty, signed on 9th March. The treaty of Amritsar, a shadowy deal formalized what was agreed in Lahore.
Allama Iqbal says of the deal:
Dahkan, Kisht, Joey Va Khayaban Farukh’tand Qaum-i- Farukh’tand Va Che Arza’n Farukh’tand!
Peasant, the land, the stream, the avenues sliced A nation was sold and how cheap was it priced?!
How long will this plight continue? Let’s all make an attempt to share the tears of