• Supreme Court terms India-held Kashmir ‘no different’ from other states in the country; sees end of Article 370 as ‘culmination of 70-year exercise’

• Orders elections to Jammu and Kashmir Assembly by Sept 30; Justice Kaul proposes reconciliation commission

• Mirwaiz calls verdict ‘sad’ but ‘expected’; Mehbooba sees the idea of India defeated; Abdullah vows legal fight

NEW DELHI: Four years after PM Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist government abrogated the special constitutional status of India-held Jammu and Kashmir, India’s Supreme Court on Monday endorsed the measure that had angered China and Pakistan and brought pain and misery to its predominantly Muslim population.

A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the power of the president to abrogate Article 370 in August 2019, leading to the re-organisation of the full-fledged State of Jammu and Kashmir to two Union Territories and stripped it of its special privileges.

The five-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, confirmed that the president could “unilaterally issue a notification that Article 370 ceases to exist”. The court held that the president had power to abrogate Article 370 if “special circumstances warrant a special solution”.

“The court cannot sit in appeal over the decision of the president on whether the special circumstances which led to the arrangement under Article 370 have ceased to exist,” the chief justice asserted.

The court said the abrogation of Article 370 was the culmination of a “gradual and collaborative exercise” spread over the past 70 years between the Centre and the State to integrate Jammu and Kashmir with the Indian Union. The objective of the integration process was to make the entirety of the rights and obligations enshrined in the Indian Constitution applicable to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, in an epilogue, referred to witnessing the inter-generational trauma caused by violence and mass migration during his travels to Jammu and Kashmir. He proposed the setting up of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to reach out to the people. The court accepted the assurance of the Modi government to restore statehood to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir “at the earliest”.

It directed the Election Commission of India to hold the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly elections by September 30, 2024.

“The fact that the abrogation of Article 370 through an executive order by the president happened after the dissolution of the Jammu and Kashmir State Legislative Assembly by the governor on November 21, 2018, and the subsequent proclamation of president’s rule under Article 356 on December 19, 2018, did not deter the court,” The Hindu noted.

“The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not have ‘internal sovereignty’ distinguishable from the powers and privileges enjoyed by other States in the country,” Chief Justice Chandrachud held.

The decision is not believed to make material difference to the disputes Pakistan and China have continued to raise over India’s claims on all or parts of the territory. The court’s verdict is expected to spur Mr Modi’s campaign for a third successive term in general elections due in May.

The Supreme Court had earlier handed his government a trophy by unwittingly endorsing the Hindu nationalist quest to build a Hindu temple at the site of the razed Babri Masjid whose destruction the court had opposed.

While the temple is due to be inaugurated with fanfare next month, the lot of the Kashmiri Muslims was in the balance until Monday. Even as they are upset, their leaders promised to continue what they see as a long haul to peacefully restore the special status.

Reaction from Kashmiri leaders

In Srinagar, rival opposition leaders Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah said they were put under house arrest, but J&K Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha rejected the claim.

“Rather than our loss,” Mehbooba Mufti said in a video address to her party workers after the SC verdict, “It is the idea of India which has suffered a defeat today. The betrayal has come from them, not us”.

Alleging that she was put under house arrest on Monday, Ms Mufti likened the verdict to “a death punishment for the idea of India. But we will continue to fight peacefully for our rights”.

Former J&K chief minister Abdullah also claimed he was put under house arrest on Monday morning ahead of the Supreme Court’s verdict. In a live broadcast on X (formerly Twitter), Mr Abdullah said: “We knocked on the doors of SC with the hope of justice. I respect the court’s decision. We may have failed, the decision may be disappointing, but it is a temporary setback. Ours is a political fight and we will fight it within the ambit of law,” he said.

He added: “The BJP succeeded in achieving its political objective after 70 years. We too will continue to strive politically so that whatever was snatched from us on August 5, 2019, is given back.”

How would the verdict play out with the wider opposition parties? Most of them were already of the view that it was a “done deal” but hoped the court would restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir and direct holding of elections.

The Hurriyat Conference reacted stoically to the verdict.

In a message, Hurriyat chief Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said: “It’s sad but the verdict was not unexpected particularly in the present circumstances. Those people who at the time of the partition of the subcontinent, facilitated the accession of J&K and reposed their faith in the promises and assurances given to them by the Indian leadership must feel deeply betrayed.”

“For the rest the state as it existed in August 1947 re­­mains divided on the ceasefire line, and hence continues to be a bleeding humanitarian and political issue, begging redressal.”

Published in Dawn, December 12th, 2023