The Fallacy of Permanency

Published by
Archive Manager

The largest and most comprehensive written Constitution in the World, the Bharateeya Constitu- tion, that consisted of 395 Articles, 22 Parts and 8 Schedules at the time of enforcement on 26th January, weighs heavier thanks to the hundred odd amendments that have been incorporated over the years. At present, standing tall quantitatively and qualitatively, with 448 Articles, 22 Parts and 12 Schedules, the Bharateeya Constitution might seem like a Bible that carries the panacea for all problems and the answer to all queries. To a large extent it is but for a few controversial and contested articles.
One such Article that has been mired in controversy from its inception, rather conception itself, has been Article 370. Titled “Temporary and Transitional Provisions” that forms Part XXI of the Constitution of Bharat, it was amended in 1962 following upheaval in North-east Bharat, whereby a word “Special” was added and the title thereafter read “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions”. Comprising of 24 Articles, from Article 369 to 392, this segment became the most invoked and debated due to Article 370, that was interpreted by vested interests in such a manner that one was made to believe that the said Article provided some kind of a ‘special’ status to the State of Jammu & Kashmir that was so sacrosanct that anyone who sought even a logical discussion on it would be indulging in blasphemy. This manmade clout of ‘non-touchability’ of the Article reigned supreme for decades until a few years ago, when the many victims of this Article namely the Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Women, numerous categories of Refugees, Terror victims, raised voice against the injustice and alienation they suffered in their very land and at the hands of their very own leaders. Article 370 opened like the Pandora’s Box, with all its aspects being deliberated and debated threadbare. It hogged the limelight, media attention and news space. The most recent being, the judgment delivered on October 9 by the Jammu & Kashmir High Court in the case of Ashok Kumar & Ors. While the case was about the “validity of reservation in promotion” in the State of Jammu & Kashmir, the undue media attention gave it the aura of an existential fight pertaining to the “permanence” of Article 370. In simple layman’s terms, the judgement stated that the existing rules/clauses followed in matters of promotion of SC and ST, cannot be implemented in the State of Jammu & Kashmir till Article 370 is in place, in its present form. A straight and simple interpretation of the existing law and the situation that it permeated, took the shape of an insidious battle for the permanence of Article 370 versus the supremacy of the Parliament to make/amend laws.

Anomaly created by Art 370
should be Rectified – JKSC 

It is necessary to place the facts about the exact position of Article 370 before the people to expose the propaganda unleashed by certain individuals and organisations with regard to Article 370, said Sri Jawahar Lal Kaul, Chairman of Jammu & Kashmir Study Centre through a press statement. He was reacting in the context of the recent judgment delivered on 9.10.2015 by Jammu & Kashmir High Court in the case of Ashok Kumar & Ors. In which the court said that the status of the article is permanent.
The fact is the recent judgment of Jammu & Kashmir High Court was basically about the issue of reservation in promotion of SCs and STs. The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India 1992 created prohibition in reservation for SC/STs in promotion.  The 77th amendment in Constitution of India introduced Sub-Section 4A to Article 16 of the Constitution whereby the effect of Indra Sawhney judgment was nullified and Governments of the states were empowered to make provision for reservation for SCs/STs in promotions. In the state of Jammu & Kashmir, reservations were introduced pursuant to the 77th amendment. The same were challenged on the limited ground of non-compliance of the procedure of Presidential Order prescribed under Article 370 of Constitution of India. In other words, the subject matter of the petition was “validity of reservation in promotion” and not “permanence of Article 370”, JKSC clarifies.  
The statement further says that Article 370 of the Constitution of India is the law of application and does not create absolute restriction on Parliament’s legislative powers on subjects in Union List and Concurrent List but merely requires a Presidential Order for issued in consultation/concurrence of State Government for enacting a law. Therefore, the core issue before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir was- whether the amendment in an Article involving fundamental right of equality (Article 16) for giving effect to reservation in promotions requires a Presidential Order or whether it would automatically be applicable to all states including Jammu & Kashmir?
Sum and substance of the Judgment:
While explaining the substance of the judgment, the statement says that the High Court held that since the Presidential Order was not issued for extending the application of 77th amendment to the State of Jammu & Kashmir, the Indra Sawhney judgment remains binding for the State of Jammu & Kashmir and therefore the reservation in promotions for SCs/STs are not available for the State of Jammu & Kashmir.
This technical defect can be cured and rectified by the present NDA government by issuing a simple Presidential Order even at this stage. This would nullify the judgment delivered by the Jammu & Kashmir High Court. JKSC feels that this will also annul the discrimination against the rights of around 25 Lakhs scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who are not at par with the SCs and STs of the whole country. The think tank says that the controversy also exposes the hypocrisy of political parties as also their insensitivity towards SCs/STs in the state of Jammu and Kashmir by keeping mum.
Showing disagreement with the the interpretations of Article 370 by the High Court, the JKSC statement clarifies that in the title to Part XXI of the Constitution of India, an amendment was carried out in 1962 whereby a word “Special” was added and the title thereafter reads as “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions”. The fact that the word “Special’ was added and the word “Temporary” was retained shows that as in 1962, the Parliament – while amending the Constitution- continued to hold that Article 370 is temporary.
JKSC called for the constitution an expert committee of eminent lawyers and jurists to look into the issue of Article 370 and take a view about revoking the said Article by following due process of law. The stamen also appeals to the Prime Minister of India and all political leaders of this country to initiate a process to remedy the anomaly and take effective steps to cure the grave injustice caused to SC/ST brethren in the State of Jammu & Kashmir.    n

Unfortunately what everyone overlooked was the fate of 25 lakhs SC/STs, who have been fighting a relentless battle to give to their children the benefits that their fellow brothers and sisters have been enjoying in the rest of Bharat for a long time now.  As a leading think tank that deals exclusively on Jammu & Kashmir issues rightly states, it is merely a case of “whether the amendment in an Article involving fundamental right of equality (Article 16) for giving effect to reservation in promotions requires a Presidential Order or whether it would automatically be applicable to all states including Jammu & Kashmir?”. Nothing more and nothing less.
Nobody is trying to undermine the sovereignty of the Parliament, least of all the learned Courts, which have all along been the custodians, interpreters and upholders of the Constitution, the Supreme Law of this Land. For a true nationalist, Article 368 of the Constitution that gives power to the Parliament to amend the Constitution and lays down the procedure for making such amendment, is as important as Article 370 that was designed and included in the “temporary and transitional provisions” to cater to the emergency and adversarial conditions prevalent in the State of Jammu & Kashmir at the time. Now under the changed circumstance, it is time to re-look and re-work this Article in the larger human and national cause. This fight can and should be best lead by the leaders of Jammu & Kashmir, who can prove to their ‘untouchable’ brethren that in order to eradicate their ‘untouchability’ from the face of this land, we will leave no Law, no Article untouched, including 370.
K Aayushi (The writer is a Researcher on J&K)

Share
Leave a Comment