What's new

India's legislative actions in Jammu and Kashmir — legal or illegal?

undercover JIX

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
2
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
India's legislative actions in Jammu and Kashmir — legal or illegal?
A challenge could be brought to the Supreme Court, which would likely reject the presidential order, experts say.
AP | Dawn.comUpdated Aug 07, 2019 12:01pm
India’s Hindu nationalist-led government on Monday used a presidential order to revoke the special constitutional status of Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government also had a bill passed to downgrade Jammu and Kashmir into a union territory instead of a state and turn a third region of the state, Ladakh, into a separate union territory.

The immediate implications are that occupied Kashmir will lose its flag, criminal code and constitution.

The big question being asked by experts, journalists and international organisations is: are India’s actions legal?


Taimur Malik@taimur_malik

https://twitter.com/taimur_malik/status/1158405440331571201

The world’s largest ‘democracy’ passed a law unilaterally taking over disputed #Kashmir territory WITHOUT:

1. Consent of IOK Assembly
2. Any Referendum
3. Providing a copy of the proposed 58 page bill even to its opposition
4. Any debate in the parliament
5. Allowing any dissent


53

11:52 AM - Aug 5, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

47 people are talking about this





“This move is a violation of the procedure in any case and can be challenged by the Supreme Court. Article 370 can only be managed by the government of Jammu and Kashmir. So, this Parliament cannot abrogate it. This is what the law says,” said A.G. Noorani, a constitutional expert who has written extensively about Kashmir, including the 2011 book “Article 370: A Constitutional History of Jammu and Kashmir”.

Many constitutional experts say the provision that allows Article 370 to be altered by presidential order requires the consent of the constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir and is therefore void because the assembly was dissolved in 1956.

“This clearly means that it [Article 370] cannot be revoked, because the only body which could have recommended it has ceased to exist,” said Yogendra Yadav, a political analyst.

“There is no Constituent Assembly. That clearly means that it cannot be revoked because the only body which could have recommended it has ceased to exist. Even if you change the meaning and say it is tantamount to the Legislative Assembly of the state, even then the state assembly does not exist.”

A challenge could be brought to the Supreme Court, which would likely reject the presidential order, experts say.

“The process by which New Delhi has scrapped the preferential status accorded to [Jammu and Kashmir] by the constitution and split J&K into two union territories is constitutionally vulnerable,” said Aman Hingorani, a lawyer and expert on Kashmir constitutionalism.

Read: ICJ condemns legislative steps taken by India in Kashmir, says 'all eyes on Indian SC'

'A plan to crush identity of Kashmiris?'
Critics have already likened Kashmir’s proposed new arrangement to the West Bank or Tibet, with settlers — armed or civilian — living in guarded compounds among disenfranchised locals.

“The decision [to split the region] will reduce Kashmir to a colony,” said Noorani, adding: "Kashmiris will oppose the Hindu feeling in the region.”

Dibyesh Anand, a social scientist at the University of Westminster, said “the fear of settler colonialism is not a specter but a reality, given the approach of both the government and a large number of Indians”.

Anand said there will a major transformation of the socio-economic landscape in Kashmir, where Hindu Indian settlers will be “presented as patriotic pioneers braving Kashmiri Muslim resentment”.

Human rights activists and residents of the troubled state have long feared such a move could destabilise the region and plunge it into chaos by redrawing sectarian lines.

Still, the main worry for many is that the central government’s actions will set in motion a plan to crush the identity of the people of Kashmir.

Indian census data puts the total population of the occupied part of Jammu and Kashmir at 12.5 million, about 68% Muslim, 28% Hindu and just under 1% Buddhist. Within the state, Kashmir is about 94% Muslim while Jammu is about 63% Hindu and 33% Muslim.

The remote mountainous Ladakh region has a population of just 274,289 people, with 46% Muslim and about 40% Buddhist.

Before the region’s special rights were revoked, New Delhi needed the regional government’s approval to apply all other laws — except in defense, foreign affairs, finance and communications.

Turning Kashmir into a union territory means the central government will gain much more control over the area’s affairs, including its courts. Electoral constituencies will be reorganised using 2011 census figures. This could further inflame the region if more power is shifted to Jammu, where Modi and his Hindu-nationalist party enjoy strong support.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1498597
 
. Consent of IOK Assembly
2. Any Referendum
3. Providing a copy of the proposed 58 page bill even to its opposition
4. Any debate in the parliament
5. Allowing any dissent
Not it's does require consent
Under 370 clause 1
Under 356b gives president powers to
To pass president orders
Bill is provide to every member of the house in Paliament under zero hour for 6 hours to add input amendments
Kindly watch Rajya Sabha debate
Secondly Bill is passed by lower house after 36 hours in lower house

356 power b was used when 1954 when 370 added into J&K Constitution

Refendum is not required under Indian constitutional Act 1935

Do that debate in both house
Upper house (BJP minority here )passe 125-61

Lower house passed it with to third majority
370-70

India Constitution doesn't allow resent under article 35 Paliament is free to make laws of any Union State of India

So it not unconstitutional Congress hundreds of times amended constitution like this

In the past to times Congess amended 370 same way

Now only discussion lies in it's interpretation by SC
And Executive
 
Not it's does require consent
Under 370 clause 1
Under 356b gives president powers to
To pass president orders
Bill is provide to every member of the house in Paliament under zero hour for 6 hours to add input amendments
Kindly watch Rajya Sabha debate
Secondly Bill is passed by lower house after 36 hours in lower house

356 power b was used when 1954 when 370 added into J&K Constitution

Refendum is not required under Indian constitutional Act 1935

Do that debate in both house
Upper house (BJP minority here )passe 125-61

Lower house passed it with to third majority
370-70

India Constitution doesn't allow resent under article 35 Paliament is free to make laws of any Union State of India

So it not unconstitutional Congress hundreds of times amended constitution like this

In the past to times Congess amended 370 same way

Now only discussion lies in it's interpretation by SC
And Executive

Its simply wrong. blindly supporting wont make it right.

Article 370 was created to bind the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India in 1947, after Maharaja Hari Singh signed what was known as the Instrument of Accession. The article gave the region significant autonomy.

The state could have its own constitution, flag and make laws. New Delhi had control over matters of foreign affairs, defence and communications. Article 370 states that Article 1 of the Indian Constitution applies to Kashmir.

However, under the Indian constitution Article 370 cannot be amended without the approval of the constitutent assembly. Article 370(3) states that “ … the President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify, provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”
 
There is no Constituent Assembly. That clearly means that it cannot be revoked because the only body which could have recommended it has ceased to exist. Even if you change the meaning and say it is tantamount to the Legislative Assembly of the state, even then the state assembly does not exist.”
Constituent assembly is Kashmir cease to exist since 1956
Seems to cherry pick things
 
Constituent assembly is Kashmir cease to exist since 1956
Seems to cherry pick things
that is one more wrong in the whole mix of wrong doings. you took away the Kashmiri rights to have constituent assembly.
defending wrong with wrong....

Since there’s no legislative assembly in Jammu and Kashmir, the Modi government and Minister of Home Affairs Amit Shah cleverly used Article 367 to make the argument that any changes to the status of the state could be considered legitmate under presidential decree.
 
However, under the Indian constitution Article 370 cannot be amended without the approval of the constitutent assembly. Article 370(3) states that “ … the President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify, provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”
Read again constitutent assembly is cease to exist in Kashmir since 1956

Governor is termed as consitution assembly under 367 clause B
Of the Indian Constitution
.

that is one more wrong in the whole mix of wrong doings. you took away the Kashmiri rights to have constituent assembly.
defending wrong with wrong....

Since there’s no legislative assembly in Jammu and Kashmir, the Modi government and Minister of Home Affairs Amit Shah cleverly used Article 367 to make the argument that any changes to the status of the state could be considered legitmate under presidential decree.
Read article 367 clause B which gives governor same powers under indian Constitution

Clause (1)(d) of Article 370

The order issued by the President todayis under this clause. It reads:

“Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,

such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify:

Provided that no such order which relates to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph (i) of sub clause (b) shall be issued except in consultation with the Government of the State:

Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred to in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of that Government.”

The clause preceding this clause states that Article 1 and 370 applies to Jammu & Kashmir. Read together, this would mean that aside from Articles 1 and 370, all the other Articles in the Constitution will apply to the State of Jammu & Kashmir subject to the exceptions and modifications made by the President. The same should, however, have consultation or concurrence of the state government – consultation if the subject is in the instrument of accession and concurrence if the subject is not in the instrument of accession.

Thus, this clause empowers the President to apply other Articles of the Constitution to the State of Jammu & Kashmir.

Clause 3 of Article 370

The second important clause is clause 3. It reads:

“Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify:

Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”

Thus, this clause empowers the President to repeal Article 370 or bring about modifications or specify exceptions to the application of Article 370.

However, such a Presidential Order under clause (3) of Article 370 can be issued only with upon the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir, a body which was dissolved in the 1950s.
A Presidential Order abrogating or modifying Article 370 can be issued only under Article 370(3) for which the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir is required.

Knowing this, the Presidential Order does not per se make any change directly to Article 370. Instead, it has amended Article 367 of the Constitution.

Article 367 of the Constitution contains nothing but some general rules regarding the interpretation of the Constitution.

By way of today’s Presidential Order, Article 367 has been amended. A new clause has been inserted into the said Article – clause (4).

The following are the major changes brought about by this new clause (4) of Article 367:

  1. As per this new clause, any reference in the Constitution to the Government of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as a reference to the Governor of the State.
  2. Likewise, any reference to the Sadar-i-Risayat (elected head of State) of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as reference to the Governor of J&K.
  3. The Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir (which was dissolved long ago in 1950s) referred to in the proviso to clause (3) of Article 370 shall be read as Legislative Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir.
The first two changes effectively affect clause (1)(b) and (1)(d) in that the power to accord concurrence to Presidential Orders has now been given to the Governor in place of the state government and Sadar-i-Risayat.

The third change to the proviso to clause 3 is, however, crucial.

Clause 3 empowers the President to repeal Article 370 or bring about modifications or specify exceptions to the application of the provision.

However, such a Presidential Order under clause (3) can be issued only with upon the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir.

Since the Constituent Assembly of the State had dissolved without recommending its abrogation, Article 370 had stood the test of time since the President was virtually powerless to abrogate this Article without a Constituent Assembly.
 
Last edited:
Read again constitutent assembly is cease to exist in Kashmir since 1956

Governor is termed as consitution assembly under 367 clause B
Of the Indian Constitution
.


Read article 367 clause B which gives governor same powers under indian Constitution
Any changes in Article 370 without the approval of Kashmiris / constituent Assembly was/is wrong. and is /was a sneaky move by Indian central Govt.

Article 370 was created to bind the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India in 1947, after Maharaja Hari Singh signed what was known as the Instrument of Accession. The article gave the region significant autonomy.

Kashmir agreed to be with India based on Article 370, hence any changes made to this article without constituent Assembly and Kashmiris is illegal.
 
Any changes in Article 370 without the approval of Kashmiris / constituent Assembly was/is wrong. and is /was a sneaky move by Indian central Govt.
Read Indian Constitution act 1935 first
Article 370 was created to bind the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India in 1947, after Maharaja Hari Singh signed what was known as the Instrument of Accession. The article gave the region significant autonomy.
Instrument of accession signed in 1947
Article 370 came in 1954 when
It added by INC by same order like BJP not once but twice
Kashmir agreed to be with India based on Article 370, hence any changes made to this article without constituent Assembly and Kashmiris is illegal.
Another lie instrument of accession was signed in 1947 have no such clause please mention source

370 added by Presidential order in 1954

Constitutent assembly of Kashmir is dissolved in 1956 itself
 
Read Indian Constitution act 1935 first

Instrument of accession signed in 1947
Article 370 came in 1954 when
It added by INC by same order like BJP not once but twice

Another lie instrument of accession was signed in 1947 have no such clause please mention source

370 added by Presidential order in 1954

Constitutent assembly of Kashmir is dissolved in 1956 itself
You keep repeating the same thing over and over.



However, under the Indian constitution Article 370 cannot be amended without the approval of the constitutent assembly. Article 370(3) states that “ … the President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify, provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”

Fact is none of the Kashmiri representative were consulted and no one agreed from Kashmiri side. This makes it wrong and illegal which is clearly stated above.

All Kashmiri leaders were kept under house arrest, additional forces and curfew clearly shows move was totally illegal.
 
You keep repeating the same thing over and over.



However, under the Indian constitution Article 370 cannot be amended without the approval of the constitutent assembly. Article 370(3) states that “ … the President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify, provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”

Fact is none of the Kashmiri representative were consulted and no one agreed from Kashmiri side. This makes it wrong and illegal which is clearly stated above.

All Kashmiri leaders were kept under house arrest, additional forces and curfew clearly shows move was totally illegal.
Read again 370 article not amended
But but article 367

Knowing this, the Presidential Order does not per se make any change directly to Article 370. Instead, it has amended Article 367 of the Constitution.

Article 367 of the Constitution contains nothing but some general rules regarding the interpretation of the Constitution.

By way of today’s Presidential Order, Article 367 has been amended. A new clause has been inserted into the said Article – clause (4).

The following are the major changes brought about by this new clause (4) of Article 367:

  1. As per this new clause, any reference in the Constitution to the Government of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as a reference to the Governor of the State.
  2. Likewise, any reference to the Sadar-i-Risayat (elected head of State) of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as reference to the Governor of J&K.
  3. The Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir (which was dissolved long ago in 1950s) referred to in the proviso to clause (3) of Article 370 shall be read as Legislative Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir.
The first two changes effectively affect clause (1)(b) and (1)(d) in that the power to accord concurrence to Presidential Orders has now been given to the Governor in place of the state government and Sadar-i-Risayat.
 
Read again 370 article not amended
But but article 367

Knowing this, the Presidential Order does not per se make any change directly to Article 370. Instead, it has amended Article 367 of the Constitution.

Article 367 of the Constitution contains nothing but some general rules regarding the interpretation of the Constitution.

By way of today’s Presidential Order, Article 367 has been amended. A new clause has been inserted into the said Article – clause (4).

The following are the major changes brought about by this new clause (4) of Article 367:

  1. As per this new clause, any reference in the Constitution to the Government of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as a reference to the Governor of the State.
  2. Likewise, any reference to the Sadar-i-Risayat (elected head of State) of Jammu & Kashmir shall be construed as reference to the Governor of J&K.
  3. The Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir (which was dissolved long ago in 1950s) referred to in the proviso to clause (3) of Article 370 shall be read as Legislative Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir.
The first two changes effectively affect clause (1)(b) and (1)(d) in that the power to accord concurrence to Presidential Orders has now been given to the Governor in place of the state government and Sadar-i-Risayat.

First Constituent Assembly dissolved. Than Kashmir put under Presidential rule, then amend constitute.
What you see here??? planned fraud and illegal move.

New Delhi said all the changes were agreed to by the state government.

For the past year, the state has been under presidential rule, after Modi's Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party pulled away from an alliance with a regional party and dissolved the state assembly.

"If there is president's rule, then how does that work? Does it fulfil the requirement?"
 
you cannot provide legal justification to these extremists hindus as they have actually imposed martial law in iok and there is no democracy in india and iok which seems to be under military rule
 
First Constituent Assembly dissolved. Than Kashmir put under Presidential rule, then amend constitute.
What you see here??? planned fraud and illegal move.
BJP not panned it now party has majority numbers how it's fraud when it's within frame work of Indian constitution
It's consitutional under article 367
How it's inconvenient
Its passed by both houses of parliament by majority votes even one house where bjp don't have numbers ???

How it's unconstitutional ??

What next Indian constitution is illegal because it's passed by same Parliament ??

Supreme court can't make laws but Paliament can, that is a power given to every elected Executive in democracies around the world
 
BJP not panned it now party has majority numbers how it's fraud when it's within frame work of Indian constitution
It's consitutional under article 367
How it's inconvenient
Its passed by both houses of parliament by majority votes even one house where bjp don't have numbers ???

How it's unconstitutional ??

What next Indian constitution is illegal because it's passed by same Parliament ??

Supreme court can't make laws but Paliament can, that is a power given to every elected Executive in democracies around the world

Basic requirement to make any changes to J&K status is, "recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”

Now when there is no constituent Assembly and J&K is under presidential rule, and India pass any resolution with 1000% votes without any consultation, recommendation and approval from J&K, its unilateral decision breaching the basic requirement of " recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State … shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.”

Again same question,

New Delhi said all the changes were agreed to by the state government.

How????? which state Govt.?????
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom