NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTION 99
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search Rediff

The nightmarish roar from Srinagar

Kashmir's Lion II has finally roared, forgetting ground realities, but not failing to give a heroic spin to the role of Kashmir's Lion I, his father, Sheikh Abdullah, who too had often roared from Srinagar before twice finding himself in a cage some 50 years ago.

Farooq Abdullah's heroic interpretation of his dear dad's dark deeds from the days of his Maharaja and after need not bother us today. What is dismaying is that his rhetoric in abusing his opponents while getting the autonomy resolution passed in the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly could well ignite the tinder that may well incinerate the very integration of Mother India. (Witness how quickly the sparks quickly reached Punjab.)

Whether that disaster ultimately happens or not, one villain of the recent heat over the autonomy question has been our media. Correspondents of all hues have simply let the issue inflame without bearding our Lion in his den. They have simply lacked the common sense and the national perspective to probe Abdullah on the following critical questions:

*In what way has Jammu and Kashmir's existing federal arrangement been a hurdle to peace and prosperity of the State?

*Will the envisaged autonomy be the magic potent to stop Pakistan's cross border terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir?

*Will the Prime Minister of an autonomous Jammu and Kashmir mean an ipso facto full stop to militancy in the State? If so, how?

*Will the new President of autonomous Jammu and Kashmir mean an ipso facto catalyst to convert the State of alms into a socio-economic paradise for its people?

*If only external affairs, communications, currency and defence are to remain with the Central government under the proposed Jammu and Kashmir autonomy plan, what would, for instance, be that State's export-import policy? Would it conflict with India's that conforms to WTO rules? Who would be responsible for foreign exchange payments that may result from unbridled imports by the autonomous entity?

If none of the above questions has been put to Abdullah and his vociferous National Conference supporters, the only reasons seem to be that (a) nobody has really cared to wade through the post-autonomy road map; (b) our media and politicians at large have no idea that Jammu and Kashmir already enjoy greater autonomy than any of the remaining 24 States and seven Union Territories that are also a part of India; (c) the nation at large, including Lion II, has not cared to spotlight the sad socio-economic condition of the Jammu and Kashmir State and link it with federal equations, if any.

One example of the palpable ignorance about Jammu and Kashmir's autonomy was contained in an interview in The Times of India dated June 24, 2000, of Abdul Ghani Bhatt, one of the All Party Hurriyat Conference leaders released from prison recently. The man believed autonomy to mean that, apart from defence and communications, the Centre would also retain the subject of finance. Clearly, the ex-militant, now a politician who matters, doesn't know the terms of the original Instrument of Accession signed by the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir. The female interviewer's silence on the man's ignorance was equally telling.

In any case, "finance" being shifted to Jammu and Kashmir State under the autonomy plank raises another issue. The Income Tax Act, 1961, and literally dozens of other financial legislation of the Indian Parliament would theoretically be subject to abolition in the envisaged autonomous Jammu and Kashmir. Nor is there any guarantee that J&K's Prime Minister can be stopped by Delhi from levying Aurangzeb's notorious jaziya tax on the State's minorities. These and more are nightmarish possibilities that no correspondent, no columnist, no commentator and no politician raised in the controversy over J&K's autonomy resolution.

These issues have not been raised primarily because this nation's citizens --- including the media folks --- are largely ignorant of the truth that at least one constitutional expert has put in print.

In his 953-page book Indian Constitutional Law (Wadhwa & Company, 1994), Dr M P Jain observes as follows:

"Jammu and Kashmir is a constituent State of the Indian Union, but its constitutional position and its relationship with the Central Government somewhat differ from that of the other States. The two characteristic features of this relationship are: (1) the State has a much greater measure of autonomy and power than enjoyed by the other States; and (2) Centre's jurisdiction within the State is more limited than what it has with respect to other States."

If that apparently startling pronouncement doesn't convince you, consider the fact that the government of India's radio network in the Abdullah domain has for years been announcing itself as "Radio Kashmir"--- the only State where the prefix of "Akashwani" or All India Radio" has remained axed.

Take more meaningful proofs as enumerated by Dr Jain: *Parliament has no power to legislate on entries 2,3,5 to 10, 12 to 15, 17, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 32, 37, 38, and 40 to 44 in the Concurrent List (List III in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution). Some of the subjects thus excluded from the Indian Parliament's purview in respect of J&K are "Criminal Procedure", "Preventive Detention", "Marriage and Divorce", "Transfer of Property", "Contracts", and "Trusts and Trustees".

*The Rajya Sabha cannot empower the Centre in the national interest to legislate on a matter in the State List (List II in the Seventh Schedule) simply because there is no State List for J&K.

*A proclamation of Emergency under Article 352 (grave threat to national security) cannot have any effect in relation to J&K State (except in regard to distribution of revenue) unless it has been made at the request of or with the concurrence of the J&K State government.

*No proclamation under Article 360 (Financial Emergency) applies to J&K.

*No decision affecting the disposition of J&K State is to be made by the Indian Parliament/Government of India without the consent of the J&K State government.

*Article 365 (non-compliance of Central directives being a justification for the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356) does not apply to J&K State.

*The power of Parliament under Article 1 to reorganise the boundaries etc of the constituent States of the Union of India is conditioned by the restriction that no Bill for such a purpose with regard to J&K is to be introduced in Parliament without the consent of the J&K legislature. (In respect of the other States, their legislatures are required only to give their views on the matter, with the Parliament in no way bound by those views).

*While India as a nation is proud of providing a range of safeguards to the minorities (Articles 14, 15, 16 and 25 to 30), no provisions regarding minorities apply to J&K State excepting those for Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes.

*An amendment to the Indian Constitution under Article 368 does not take effect in J&K unless applied there by a Presidential Order under Article 370(1).

*Directive Principles of State Policy (Articles 38 to 51) do not operate in J&K.

*Notwithstanding any Fundamental Right, the J&K State legislature has the power to define persons who will be regarded as permanent residents of the State and to confer on them any special rights, or impose on others any restrictions concerning employment under the State government, acquisition of property within the State, settlement in the State and right to scholarships provided by the State.

It would thus seem that what remains to clinch the argument that J&K is already the most autonomous State in the country is only to add "QED" at the end of the above list.

"What about financial autonomy?" you might ask. Well, New Delhi hasn't ever stood in J&K's way to levy more taxes as permitted by the Constitution of India nor to raise revenue through other means, to promote business, commerce and industry. On the other hand, it is that myth of "Kashmiriat" (whatever it is supposed to mean) that has made every J&K Chief Minister the only one of his kind not to woo industrialists from the rest of India or from

abroad to his State in all these long years since the country began pursuing economic development as almost a national mission.

Instead, the J&K State has erroneously believed that, dubbed as a second Switzerland, it can be economically self-sustaining through its tourism, albeit seasonal, backed by its handicrafts of carpets, shawls et al and apple or other orchards. Forgotten in this misguided belief is that Switzerland itself is not only a year-round tourist paradise but also world renowned for its watch manufacturing, cheese and chocolates, and engineering as well as pharmaceutical products, leave alone its banking network.

The stark truth is that the political churning now peaking in J&K owes not a little to the cold statistics in the accompanying Table which, used earlier by this columnist, bears repetition.

Vital Socio-Economic Statistics of Jammu and Kashmir State

Socio-Economic Indicator

Sr. No.	Measure	Comparative Status of J&K
1.	Literacy among total population 26.17 %	By far the lowest in India; lower than even the Union Territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli (41.0 %), Daman and Diu (74.58 %) and Lakshwadeep (79.23 %)
2.	Proportion of children (age group 6 to 11 years) enrolled in primary schools, 1997-98 67 %	Stands 24th in descending order among India's 25 states
3.	Decennial growth of population, 1981-1991 (Official projection for J&K and not Census estimate as for other States) 28.9%	Higher than the All-India average by 5.1%, and lower than only the north-eastern states of Manipur (29.3%), Meghalaya (32.9%) Tripura (34.3%) and Nagaland (56.1 %)
4.	Per capita income, 1996-97 (Provisional Estimates) Rs. 6,658	Stands 22nd in descending order among India's 25 states, its per capita income being higher only than that of Orissa (Rs.5,893), Tripura (Rs. 5,432), and Bihar (Rs 4,231).
5.	The All-India national per capita income for the reference year was Rs 12,2375. Growth in per capita income in 1996-97 over 1990-91 72.1%	Stands 23rd in descending order among the 25 states; lower growth was recorded only by Assam (61.8%) and Bihar (59.1%)
6.	Gross industrial output per capita, 1995-96 Rs. 1,215	Lowest among 25 states of India and just a little more than half of Bihar's (Rs.2,295)
7.	Per capita value added in industries, 1995-96 Rs. 178	Lowest among 25 states of India and less than one third of Bihar's (Rs.527)
8.	Average daily number of factory employment per 100,000 of population, 1996 300	Lowest among 25 states of India
9.	Fertiliser consumption per hectare of cropped area, 1997-98 57.8 %	Stands 20th in the descending order of 25 states

Source: (a) Manorama Year Book 2000 for items 1,4 and 5 citing latest available figures from Directorate of Economics and Statistics and Central Statistical Organisation, New Delhi. (b) Statistical Outline of India 1999-2000 of Tata Services Limited, Mumbai, for all remaining items 2,3,6,7,8 and 9

If J&K's youth is grossly unemployed and frustrated today, if its women have hardly made a mark on the national scene, if its children have a foreboding future and if there is a feeling of utter helplessness everywhere -- be it in Jammu or Ladakh or in the Valley itself -- the solution does not lie in even more autonomy. Rather, the only way out is through much better governance than hitherto, a willingness to bury the ghost of divine ethnic superiority and a fierce commitment to speedy, all-round development. And the time to begin that long march ahead is now, right now.

Arvind Lavakare