A.G. Noorani in The Statesman, 13 July, 2000
On 13 May 1992, the Governor of J&K, G.C. Saxena, ruled out categorically any move for trifurcation of the State. (On 7 June, 2000) in contrast, Advani has encouraged it. The ritual qualification "within the four corners of the Constitution" is less relevant than the fact that the Home Minister has countenanced ("can discuss") the trifurcation and in the context of the memo the LBA gave to the PM that day containing the demand.
Constitutionally, the Centre has no right or power in this matter at all. Article 3 empowers Parliament "by law" to "diminish the area of any State". In relation to Kashmir, no such Bill can even "be introduced in Parliament without the consent of the Legislature of that State". The Centre has no business to offer to "consider" a demand whose acceptance is the sole prerogative of Kashmir.
... Jammu's separation from the state of Jammu and Kashmir was demanded by the Jan Sangh at the very moment of its birth in 1951. It will lead to a partition of the state on communal lines with incalculable consequences, at home and internationally. The region of Ladakh comprises to districts - Leh, which is predominantly Muslim Kargil which "would remain with Kashmir" as an influential leader Asghar Karbalayee said on 19 June.
Jammu will split evenly. Three of its six districts have a Muslim majority - Doda (63.59 per cent; Poonch (88.87 per cent); and Rajouri (6097 per cent). The Iatter two abut the LoC. The other three are Udhampur, Jammu and Kathua. A tehsil in Udhampur and three in Rajouri will go to the Valley.
Jawaharlal Nehru told the Lok Sabha on 25 March 1953: "It has been proposed ... 'Well, if not Kashmir, let Jammu become completely inter-related with India'. That obviously means that the Jammu and Kashmir state is disrupted. And we support his famous process of integration by disruption and by throwing away inevitably the rest of the State into somebody's lap".
Sheikh Abdullah sharply reminded Shyamaprasad Mookerjee on 4 February 1953: "This arrangement Article 370 has not been arrived at now but as early as 1949 when you happened to be a part of the Government". Nehru delivered the same reminder in the Lok Sabha on 7 August 1952: "A basis which was made in my absence from India
. and laid down by ... Sardar Patel. The Constituent Assembly adopted Article 370 of the Constitution on 17 October, 1949.
... Whenever Sheikh Abdullah spoke of Kashmir's autonomy vis-à-vis Centre, he stressed also the need for autonomy to its regions in his inaugural address to the State's Constituent Assembly on 5 November 1951, and repeatedly later.
... Districts or regions within a state are exposed to its government's "overlordship" regardless of whether it has a "special status" within the Union or not. Devolution of power from the state capital downwards alone can prevent that. Hence, the 73"d and 74" Constitutional Amendments
(1992) on the panchayats and the municipalities, respectively. Jammu and Leh enjoy no better "protection" from Srinagar now or would if Article 370 were restored to what it was before its unconstitutional erosion. They do need fair guarantees of devolution ...
.. Devolution of power to Scotiand and Wales is one of them. On 11 April 1992 the BJP leader Chaman Lal presented the PM with a memo which demanded inter alia "Statutory Regional Councils be established in all the three regions of Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir on the principle of division of legislative, executive and judicial powers of the State between the State and the Region ... within the framework of the. Indian Union and the unity of the States". It can be improved upon.
... As Governor G.C. Saxena had said in an interview to this paper on 6 May 1992 that "short of secession or azaadi (freedom), Kashmir can have anything within the framework of the Indian Constitution ...
Let us look beyond our frontiers to gain some perspective, some calm. At our instance, Sri Lanka acknowledged in the 1987 accord that it "is a multi-ethnic and a multi-lingual plural society". India is much larger, far more diverse. The Meech Lake Accord (1987) between the PM and the Premiers of Canada's ten Provinces recongised "that Quebec constitutes within Canada a distinct society" ... The Supreme Court of Canada's ruling on 20 August 1998 is very relevant to our situation. It said that the "principle of federation facilitates the pursuit of collect give goals of cultural and linguistic minorities which form the majority within a particular province. This is the case in Quebec ... " it cannot secede "unilaterally""' but nor can Ottawa ignore separatist sentiments in the province. The solution lies in "negotiations". The Court passed severe strictures on refusal by either the Centre or the Province earnestly "to negotiate in accordance with the constitutional principles" it had outlined in the judgement. It was a unanimous judgement by nine judges of distinction. A model of judicial statesmanship, it frowned on both extremes.
That is the only course open to all concerned in Kashmir. The LoC divides Jammu as well as the Valley. We need to look beyond it and to promote dialogue at all levels - with the Hurriyat, between the two halves of Kashmir, with Pakistan, and, indeed, with all the elements in all the regions of the State. If the two Koreas can sign an agreement on reunion of separated families, why cannot India and Pakistan in respect of divided Kashmir ?...
