Kashmir interlocutors want a Consitutional Committee to review all Central laws
New Delhi, May 24: Ruling out a return to the pre-1953 position, Centre's interlocutors today recommended setting up of a Constitutional Committee to review all Acts and Articles of the Constitution of India extended to
PTI
May 24, 2012 19:02 IST
New Delhi, May 24: Ruling out a return to the pre-1953 position, Centre's interlocutors today recommended setting up of a Constitutional Committee to review all Acts and Articles of the Constitution of India extended to Jammu and Kashmir and upholding of Article 370.
The report of the interlocutors—Dileep Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M M Ansari—underlined that “the clock cannot be set back” but felt that the ‘erosion' of Article 370 over decades needed to be “re-appraised” to give it more powers.
In their 176-page report, made public today, they have called for a review of all Central Acts and all Articles of the Constitution of India extended to the state after the 1952 Delhi agreement which also gave special status to the state under Article 370.
“This does not mean a pure and simple return to the pre-1953 situation. The clock cannot be set back. Instead, the group wants such a review to take into full account the changes that have taken place in the last six decades,” the report said.
In the pre-1953 era, the Centre's jurisdiction was mainly restricted to Defence, External Affairs, Communication and Finance.
The 1952 agreement between the Centre and Sheikh Abdullah enabled extension of all the central acts, Articles of Constitution of India including Supreme Court and hoisting of Indian tri-colour along with the state flag.
Significantly, the state assembly passed a resolution in 2000 demanding among other things rescinding of all central legislation except Defence, Finance, Telecom and External Affairs, which was rejected by the Union Government.
In a move aimed at strengthening of Article 370, the interlocutors report demanded deletion of the word ‘temporary' from its heading in the Constitution and replacing it with ‘special' as has been used in Article 371 in the case of some states.
A similar recommendation was made in the autonomy resolution of the state Assembly.
Padgaonkar later said that interlocutors have not recommended abolition of Article 370. “What we have said is that we are not inventing something. Under article 371 there are several states of the Union which have been designated as special category states.
“We have just said that you remove the word temporary as regards J and K and use the word special as it is being done in the case of several states. We have listed the state which come under the category of special states. Instead of temporary, we wanted to put the word special in line with what is being done with the other states.”
The interlocutors have recommended status quo in the use of nomenclatures in English of Governor and Chief Minister and equivalent nomenclatures in Urdu may be used. In an earlier era until 1965, the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir was addressed as ‘Wazir-e-Azam' (Prime Minister) and the Governor as ‘Sadar-e-Riyasat' (President).
The report said the state assembly will submit three names to the President to the post of Governor who will be appointed by the President.
It also suggested that there should be no change in Article 356 and if the state government is dismissed, elections should be held within three months. Interestingly the Group suggests that for internal emergency, prior consultations with the state government is required.
It should be headed by an eminent personality who enjoys the esteem of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and of the people of the India as a whole.
It should include as its members Constitutional experts who enjoy confidence of all major stake holders.
The CC's conclusions, to be reached within six months, will be binding on “all of them”.
The interlocutors group has said that the CC shall be mandated to conduct its review bearing in mind the dual character of Jammu and Kashmir—being a constituent unit of Indian union and enjoying a special status under Article 370 of the Constitution—and the dual character of the people— state subjects as well as Indian citizens.
“The review will, therefore, have to determine whether - and to what extent - the central Acts and Articles of Constitution of India, extended with or without amendment to the state, have dented Jammu and Kashmir's special status and abridged the state government's powers to cater to welfare of its people,” the report said.
The CC's recommendations must be reached through consensus so that they are acceptable to all stake holders represented in the state assembly and Parliament. The next step would be for the President in exercise of powers under Article 370 to issue an order incorporating the recommendations of the CC.
The order will need to be ratified by a Bill in both Houses of Parliament and by each House in the state legislature by a special two-thirds majority to be presented to the President for assent.
“Once this order is over, clauses (1) and (3) of Article 370 shall cease to be operative and no orders shall be made by the President here after under the said clauses as from the date of final order,” it said.
The report recommended that for promotion of the state's economic self-reliance, a fresh financial agreement between the Centre and the state is required.
The report also listed several recommendations to harmonise relations between people on both the sides of Line of Control including a hassle-free movement of people and goods across the LoC and a consultative mechanism where elected representatives from both sides can deliberate on issues of common interests like water, economy, tourism and trade.
This would be especially effective if democratic institutions of self-governance are established in areas of princely state under the de-facto control of Pakistan.
“The core idea here is to make the LoC irrelevant, a mere line on a map,” it said.
The report of the interlocutors—Dileep Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M M Ansari—underlined that “the clock cannot be set back” but felt that the ‘erosion' of Article 370 over decades needed to be “re-appraised” to give it more powers.
In their 176-page report, made public today, they have called for a review of all Central Acts and all Articles of the Constitution of India extended to the state after the 1952 Delhi agreement which also gave special status to the state under Article 370.
“This does not mean a pure and simple return to the pre-1953 situation. The clock cannot be set back. Instead, the group wants such a review to take into full account the changes that have taken place in the last six decades,” the report said.
In the pre-1953 era, the Centre's jurisdiction was mainly restricted to Defence, External Affairs, Communication and Finance.
The 1952 agreement between the Centre and Sheikh Abdullah enabled extension of all the central acts, Articles of Constitution of India including Supreme Court and hoisting of Indian tri-colour along with the state flag.
Significantly, the state assembly passed a resolution in 2000 demanding among other things rescinding of all central legislation except Defence, Finance, Telecom and External Affairs, which was rejected by the Union Government.
In a move aimed at strengthening of Article 370, the interlocutors report demanded deletion of the word ‘temporary' from its heading in the Constitution and replacing it with ‘special' as has been used in Article 371 in the case of some states.
A similar recommendation was made in the autonomy resolution of the state Assembly.
Padgaonkar later said that interlocutors have not recommended abolition of Article 370. “What we have said is that we are not inventing something. Under article 371 there are several states of the Union which have been designated as special category states.
“We have just said that you remove the word temporary as regards J and K and use the word special as it is being done in the case of several states. We have listed the state which come under the category of special states. Instead of temporary, we wanted to put the word special in line with what is being done with the other states.”
The interlocutors have recommended status quo in the use of nomenclatures in English of Governor and Chief Minister and equivalent nomenclatures in Urdu may be used. In an earlier era until 1965, the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir was addressed as ‘Wazir-e-Azam' (Prime Minister) and the Governor as ‘Sadar-e-Riyasat' (President).
The report said the state assembly will submit three names to the President to the post of Governor who will be appointed by the President.
It also suggested that there should be no change in Article 356 and if the state government is dismissed, elections should be held within three months. Interestingly the Group suggests that for internal emergency, prior consultations with the state government is required.
It should be headed by an eminent personality who enjoys the esteem of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and of the people of the India as a whole.
It should include as its members Constitutional experts who enjoy confidence of all major stake holders.
The CC's conclusions, to be reached within six months, will be binding on “all of them”.
The interlocutors group has said that the CC shall be mandated to conduct its review bearing in mind the dual character of Jammu and Kashmir—being a constituent unit of Indian union and enjoying a special status under Article 370 of the Constitution—and the dual character of the people— state subjects as well as Indian citizens.
“The review will, therefore, have to determine whether - and to what extent - the central Acts and Articles of Constitution of India, extended with or without amendment to the state, have dented Jammu and Kashmir's special status and abridged the state government's powers to cater to welfare of its people,” the report said.
The CC's recommendations must be reached through consensus so that they are acceptable to all stake holders represented in the state assembly and Parliament. The next step would be for the President in exercise of powers under Article 370 to issue an order incorporating the recommendations of the CC.
The order will need to be ratified by a Bill in both Houses of Parliament and by each House in the state legislature by a special two-thirds majority to be presented to the President for assent.
“Once this order is over, clauses (1) and (3) of Article 370 shall cease to be operative and no orders shall be made by the President here after under the said clauses as from the date of final order,” it said.
The report recommended that for promotion of the state's economic self-reliance, a fresh financial agreement between the Centre and the state is required.
The report also listed several recommendations to harmonise relations between people on both the sides of Line of Control including a hassle-free movement of people and goods across the LoC and a consultative mechanism where elected representatives from both sides can deliberate on issues of common interests like water, economy, tourism and trade.
This would be especially effective if democratic institutions of self-governance are established in areas of princely state under the de-facto control of Pakistan.
“The core idea here is to make the LoC irrelevant, a mere line on a map,” it said.