Article 370 of the Constitution of India

Sheikh Gulzar

Article 370 of the Constitution of India is a special article that gives  special status to the erstwhile Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. This article gives the State of Jammu and Kashmir the freedom to frame and maintain its own constitution while prohibiting the implementation of the federal constitution in Jammu and Kashmir in most matters. Under this special article, except for defense, finance, foreign affairs, etc., the Union Government cannot implement Indian laws in the State of Jammu and Kashmir without the ratification and approval of the Central Parliament and the State Government. Under Article 370, the State of Jammu and Kashmir enjoys a special and unique position.

The provisions and laws of the Indian Constitution that are applicable to other States cannot be applied to the State of Jammu and Kashmir under this article.

Under this article, many fundamental issues of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, including property, citizenship and fundamental human rights for citizens, are different from the general laws of India. An attempt has also been made to preserve the 1927 Resident States Act of head of the state of  J&k  Hari Singh, whereby no ordinary citizen of India can buy property within the state of Jammu and Kashmir, this is not limited to the ordinary citizens of India, but Indian corporations and other private and public companies cannot acquire property within the state without legal justification. According to this law, state land cannot be occupied for the construction of residential colonies and setting up industrial factories, dams and other factories within the state. For any kind of changes, it is necessary to obtain the consent of the state representatives who are present in the form of an elected assembly.

Being a part of the constitution, its implementation is mandatory, however, it is a transitional provision. It plays a role in paving the way for the formation of a transitional structure.

The purpose of this article is to protect the state rights of Jammu and Kashmir. The impetus for this article is the agreement made with the head of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, which stated that the state would not be forced to accept the federal Constitution of India in any way. 

Its main objectives are as follows:
The central Constitution of India will apply to the state only in certain matters.
The state will frame its own constitution, which will shape the government structure in the state.

Any administrative change by the central government can be made in the state only when the state assembly gives its permission.

This article can be changed only when the requirements for the change in the article are met and the will of the state is included in it, which is interpreted by the state assembly there.
The change in the article can be made only on the recommendations of the state assembly, the center is not authorized to do so.

Magray added, “Darkness has pervaded our world. He was innocent. I want justice”.

Kulgam (South Kashmir)

Sitting in the corner of a dimly-lit room, Nazir Ahmad Magray struggles to make sense of the sudden demise of his youngest son Imtiyaz Ahmad, the family’s lone breadwinner whose body was fished out from Vishaw river in Kulgam on May 4.

Ahmad, 27, a Class 10 dropout who supported his poor parents by working as a daily wage labourer, was whisked away from his home by a joint team of police and army personnel who descended on this sleepy south Kashmir village in the early hours of Saturday (3 May), Magray said.

“I offered them tea, but they refused saying they had to check Imtiyaz’s mobile phone and then he would be released. They would have taken him away only over my dead body if I had known what was going to happen,” Magray told The Wire at his dilapidated single-storey house.

The distraught father of five daughters and three sons, seven of whom are married and live separately with their own families, refuses to believe the allegations that Ahmad was involved in illegal activities.

“He was working as a daily wage labourer in Punjab from where he returned recently. He has never been to a police station as there’s no case against him. If he was a militant, why wasn’t he thrown into jail after his arrest?” 

More info : https://thewire.in/security/kulgam-family-grieves-after-son-drowns-in-river-while-escaping-police/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKG7J1leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF4QnV6a29nR1phOXZLRFd2AR7g2lv8varjLz0aF5bK7eql8zc_lL6YTN0bpKg1Y8UgTUxJEY1F2VpBwiUWXA_aem_2sRAjDwhp70t4ka9xsfIZw

Who was the loser in the latest Phalgam attack ?

The Kashmiris. After the abrogation of Article-370, the Kashmiris went through a system of oppression. Curfew and austerity had destroyed their economy. Now, when some possibilities of tourism were created somewhere, the incident of attack took place in Pahalgam.

This question demands attention, is this an attack on India's interests or is it an attack on the economy of the Kashmiris?

Pahalgam is a Muslim-majority area. The economy of the Muslims, Sikhs and out sider Indian hindus here is linked to tourism. Why would any Kashmiri  militant groups destroy the economy of its own people?

Now, in practice, it has happened that the economy of the Kashmiris  was destroyed, the blame fell on Pakistan. This has had all-round effects. On one side, there is the international community in front of which Pakistan is being indicted. On the other side, there are the Kashmiris who are being convinced that look, Pakistan is the one who is attacking your economy.

Not only this, but with this, the path of further austerity in Kashmir will also be paved in the name of security. The process of grabbing Kashmiri lands in the name of security will also accelerate and there will be justification for it.

The issue of land is very important. This aspect is also a fundamental motivation for changing the Muslim Waqf law in India because the Muslim Waqf has 5,045 square kilometers of land. This area is more than many countries in the world. Six times more than Singapore and Bahrain. India has a special 'benevolent eye' on it.

This process of colonization and land grabbing is also going on in Kashmir under different titles, and it is likely to intensify further in the name of security.

The economy of Kashmiri Muslims is being destroyed, a storm will rise against Pakistan and Kashmiris at the diplomatic level. Indian journalists are also talking about surgical strikes. All this is happening at a time when Pakistan seems to be recovering from the economic crisis to some extent. This question becomes very important that who is the beneficiary of this whole situation?

No matter how the interest is calculated, India appears to be the beneficiary. Therefore, it is natural for the question to arise whether this incident was terrorism or some internal or external  game.

Who benefits from the Pahalgam attack?

Chattisinghpora, Pathribal, and Barakpora massacres

Every form of terrorism is detestable, but the way the blame is being placed on Pakistan once again, without any investigation or investigation, as usual, and the Indian media has taken the stand against Pakistan, this irresponsible behavior raises the question of whether this was not an external game?

On the one hand, the US Vice President is in India, on the other hand, the Indian Prime Minister is on a visit to Saudi Arabia. After cutting short his visit to Saudi Arabia, Narendra Modi returns to India. This is a scenario like a Hollywood blockbuster movie where the elements of taking the intensity of the reaction to an incident to the extreme have been painstakingly fulfilled.

Now, a slightly harsher reaction from the US than usual is also natural and returning from a visit to Saudi Arabia like this is not an uncommon thing. It is as if the plot is complete here, like a Hollywood movie or a Shakespearean tragedy, and the climax is also magnificent. The question is, is it coincidence or ‘well-planned’?

In the past, when Clinton visited India, about 35 Sikhs were killed and now, when the US Vice President is visiting India, the growing tourism potential of Kashmir has been destroyed. The similarities between the two incidents are also noteworthy.

India’s general relations with both Sikhs and Kashmiris have been tense and the reasons for this are well known. What a coincidence that in an incident that makes India ‘oppressed’ in the international community, the real losers are those who are the unwelcome classes of India.