No, it isn't even a case of "legal loopholes" being exploited, rather it can be defined as constitutional exceptionalism. This is a strange path for a self declared democratic nation to pursue, especially one that criticises autocratic and communist nations as a matter of routine. The hypocrisy is truly palpable.
Rather than an oppression of women, the legal statute you refer to was designed to resist non-Kashmiri inheritance of native Kashmiri assets. Such protectionism is the whole point of semi-autonomous or autonomous status. They have every right to protect their land and assets by using such legislation so your efforts to frame it as some blanket discrimination against women is what's "disingenuous" here.
Moreover, regardless of what legal loopholes existed in terms of the abrogation of Kashmir's semi-autonomous status, executive exceptionalist action still had to be taken. For starters, the dissolution of local parliament and imposition of central governorship in Nov 2018. There was no justification for this. It was a ruse from the start. That Delhi's constitution permits such an act under contentious circumstances actually suggests India is an autocratic republic more akin to autocratic or communist nations whenever it suits Delhi to be as such.
https://www.sadf.eu/focus-45-kashmi...amper-india-and-pakistan-relations-in-future/
There are multiple criticisms and identified legal errors with regards to Delhi's actions last August. That no Indian supreme court will ever admit to them is simply another damming indictment of India's descent into autocracy, where the once independent arms of statehood now simply validate one another in a perpetual cycle of rubber stamping of autocratic rule.
"It is important also to see Article 370 in the light of clause 7 of the
Instrument of Accession signed by
Maharaja Hari Singh that declared that the State could not be compelled to accept any future constitution of India. The State was within its rights to draft its own constitution and to decide for itself what additional powers to extend to the government in Delhi. Article 370 was designed to protect those rights. According to the constitutional scholar
A. G. Noorani, Article 370 records . Neither India nor the State can unilaterally amend or abrogate the Article except in accordance with the terms of the Article (Article 370 of the constitution of India, para 13). Furthermore, Article 370 embodied six special provisions for Jammu and Kashmir:
- It exempted the state from the complete applicability of the Constitution of India. The state was allowed to have its own constitution.
- Central legislative powers over the state were limited, at the time of framing, to the three subjects of defence, foreign affairs and communications.
- Other constitutional powers of the central government could be extended to the state only with the concurrence of the state government.
- The ‘concurrence’ was only provisional. It had to be ratified by the state’s Constituent Assembly.
- The state government’s authority to give ‘concurrence’ lasted only until the state constituent assembly was convened. Once the state constituent assembly finalised the scheme of powers and dispersed, no further extension of powers was possible.
- Article 370 could be abrogated or amended only upon the recommendation of the State’s Constituent Assembly (Article 370 of the constitution of India, para 14)."
Note that the "constituent assembly" was dissolved in 1957, without having made any indication of a desire to abrogate article 370. Indeed, Modi didn't exploit "loopholes" in the law, rather he simply rewrote the law to suit his requirements, annulling previous statutes, principles, promises and legally declared entitlements as he saw fit. Your suggestion that Modi is some legal whizzkid surrounded by the talents of individuals like Yogis and Shah that allowed him to exploit loopholes in constitutional documents is laughable. He's no different to Putin rewriting law to extend his rule, or even Musharraf rewriting law to further his post-coup career. These guys aren't politico-legal geniuses that you can write an in depth docuseries about. They're pretty straightforward people.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...ir-is-not-kosher-yet/article28836245.ece/amp/