LUCID MAINS CURRENT AFFAIRS 2018
- ARTICLE 35 A
WHY TO FOCUS?
- An NGO “We the Citizens “challenged Article 35 A in supreme court.
- Argues that, it was not added to the constitution through amendment under Article 368 .
- it was incorporated into the constitution by an order of the then president Rajendra prasad
On the advice of Jawahar Lal Nehru cabinet under 370 (1) (d) of the constitution.
- Court held the validity of the Article 370 of the constitution in Sampath parakash case.
- But still no idea about whether the president can introduce a new Article without the Parliaments knowledge.
- Another case filed in supreme court by 2 kashmiri women arguing that the law disenfranchised their children as they married with non permanent resident .
- Original provision was gender discriminatory as it disqualified women who are married to non-Permanent residents.
- But Jammu and Kashmir high Court held that they will not loose their rights but they will not have succession right.
- This issue need to be sorted out.
- Supreme Court referred these petitions to 3 – judge bench and decided that the validity of Article 35 A and 370 will be decided by a constitution bench.
- 1927 – Jammu and Kashmir, the only state with Muslim majority ruled by a Hindu king (Maharaja Hari Singh).
- Jammu and Kashmir had border with both India and Pakistan.
- 1947 – When Pakistan sponsored tribals attacked Jammu and Kashmir, Maharaja acceded Jammu and Kashmir to India.
- After accession popular leader Sheikh Abdulla took over the reign from Maharaja.
- 1949 – negotiation with New Delhi led to the inclusion of article 370 to the constitution
- Article 370 – provides special status to Jammu and Kashmir and restricts union legislation over Defence, foreign affairs and communication.
- 1952 – Delhi agreement between Abdullah and Nehru – several provisions extended to Jammu and Kashmir via presidential order thus inserted Article 35A.
WHAT IT IS ARTICLE 35A?
- Empowers Jammu and Kashmir legislature to define peramanant residents of the state and provide special rights and priviilage to them.
- Article 35 A prohibits non permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir from settlement in the state and from acquiring immovable property ,government job ,scholarship and aids
- Permanent Resident – is a person who was a state subject on 14 th may 1954 (according to Jammu and Kashmir constitution) or who has been a resident of the state for 10 years and has lawfully acquired immovable property in the State.
- Jammu and Kashmir legislature can alter definition of Permanent Resident only through a law passed by 2/3rd
- Denies property right to a women who marries a non permanent resident and her children.
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF ARTICLE 35 A
- Dilute autonomy given under Article 370 of the constitution
- Breach UN Resolution
- Status of Jammu and Kashmir is still an open question under international law.
- UN Resolution planned for a plebiscite.
- But as the conditions were not fulfilled by the countries, the decision is still pending in UN.
- Will alter the demography of the state if repealed.
- Affect the cultural identity of the people, especially of Dogra community.
- Even after 70 years, demography remains more or less same mainly because of Article 35 A.
- So any move to alter the autonomy by repealing the Article 35 A may back fire at India.
- External Security issue
- Pakistan may take advantage of the situation
- Border with China and Pakistan become more vulnerable.
- Internal secury issues.
- Further the violence and agitation.
- Increase militancy and separatist activities.
- Opportunities will be decreased.
- Both skilled and unskilled workers will be affected.
- Increase competition from outside.
- Intense pressure on land holding for settlement.
- Cause environmental problems.
- Youth will be deprived of their concession in the recruitment of security forces, education, and job.
- Will have to face strong competition from outside the state.
- In case of land buying issue, there are other states like Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand which also keeps the native of state provision in buying land.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST ARTICLE 35A
- Gender discriminatory provisions.
- Children of women who marries a non permanent resident will not have succession rights.
- Violates fundamental rights of non permanent residents of the state.
VIOLATE ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION.
- Could not protect the demographic identity of the people completely.
- Failed to act against expulsion of Kashmiri pandits.
- Boost the economy
- because of open investment
- Accelerate development.
- Sections like valmiki community and other sections of SC/ST community are deprived of their benefits.
- As they don’t fulfill the permanent resident criteria.
- The definition can be altered by a law passed by state with 2/3rd
- Can adress the sensitive issues like gender discrimination, SC/ST community etc
- Against the “very spirit of oneness” of India.
- Give more room for divisive politics.
- Initiative from the state and center to address the sensitive issues like gender discrimination, and consideration for backward community etc …instead of repealing Article 35A completely.
- Focus on development of state by promoting investment.
- Create more job opportunity for youth so that their energy won’t diverted to divisive politics and militant activities.
- Integrate the people of state with rest of the country through programs like Ek Bharat Sresht Bharat . So that they feel safe and homely in other part of the country.
- Make them competent to face candidates from various parts of the country .