Legislative imbalance in J&K

By Col. D.S. Jamwal

There seems to be a misconception in the minds of the Valley leaders, and also with so-called secular experts in Delhi, that Kashmiris of the Valley specifically are a special people, need extra special treatment and therefore must be molly-coddied. It is indeed a travesty that this false impression has been created over the years. Does it imply that Valley Kashmiri’s face different problems of economic, social, educational, financial and administrative nature which are different from the citizens of the other two regions of the State and the rest of the States of the Union?

Local political parties of other States of the Union as well as all-India level political groups are individually and collectively concerned about improving the lives of their countrymen, and in the process, promise better governance, administration and other benefit and facilities. Yet, rather than work to this end, with malafide intent, Valley-based leaders continue to mislead their followers with trans-national thinking, encouraging political activity of a nefarious variety, and concocting hare-brained schemes.

The Accords of 1952, 1975 and 1986 with Congress-run Central governments were obviously blackmailing tactics for more ‘concessions’ despite Article 370. As a matter of fact, the administrative set-up progressively became more inefficient and politically, the situation worsened. These armtwisting tactics of the Valley leadership now need to be finally stopped once for all.

The question that begs an honest answer therefore is that how does autonomy, more political concessions, pre-1953 status, etc. give them an edge on overall improvement. Surely that all-India yardsticks for a better life, applicable to all communities in India, should also apply to them. Article 370 has already granted them extensive funds, multifarious loans and unfettered advances, much above all-India averages. If anything, this magnanimous licence to Central largesse, practically unaudited and totally misused, needs to be curbed and sensibly re-distributed within the State. Particularly, that it does not reach anti-India groups in the Valley, as has been the case so far.

The elections that were held in October 2002 elected representatives to the Legislative Assembly, must be equally adjudged against the present legislative layout of the three provinces of the State, Ladakh, Jammu and the Valley, and whether after the past 50 years with so many elections having been held earlier, the aspirations of the three areas have been fulfilled. If not, the reasons behind this lack of performance.

Legislative Index, Impact & Fallout

As per the Indian Constitution, seat allotment in legislative assemblies is on the basis of geographical size, population, road communications etc. The criteria laid down specifies the number of seats that must be allotted against these yardsticks. This aspect is covered by the Representation of J&K People's Act as per Article 370 of the Indian Constitution.

In this context, the “Table of Population on “Census and Area” under “Fact and figures”, Kashmir valley has an area of 16000 kms, and a population of 31.0 lacs. Jammu Province an area of 26,500 kms and population of 27.0 lacs and Ladakh an area of 96,700 kms with a population of around 14.0 lacs.

Population figures are based on 1981 census.

Applicability of the number of seats is therefore to be based on the following facts. Firstly, Jammu Region is one and a half times the size of the Valley and comprises 45 percent of the States population; Secondly, Ladakh Province is the largest of all the regions with its population thinly spread over a large area; Thirdly; The Valley is much smaller in size and has a comparatively denser population (only); and lastly; The Ladakh and Jammu regions combined overall comprise more than half the States area and over 50 percent of the total population.

Despite these basic parameters, the initial De-Limitation Commission, obviously under misadvised political pressure at that point of time, made seat allotments to the State Legislative Assembly in an inconsistent and unproportionate manner, effects of which have had long reaching consequences on the J&K scenario. Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to study the seat allotments as made by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah past-1947 after accession of the State to the Indian Union.

Jammu was initially given 30 seats, (later raised to 32 seats), while Ladakh was given a paltry 2 seats. The Valley was given a total of 43 seats. This was a patently un-equitably allotment put across under a stage-managed show of representation, which unfortunately under Sheikh Abdullah’s influence on the then PM, went unnoticed. Subsequently the last De-Limitation Commission, failed to correct the biased and parochial representation and proceeded to retain the imbalance by giving Jammu 37 seats but unnecessarily without valid reasons increased the Valley representation to 46 seats. Ladakh was not given any additional seats despite several protestations.

After the Praja Parishad agitation and recommendations made under Governor rule, the Wazir Commission was subsequently set-up in 1983 to go into these complaints of the Jammu and Ladakh regions. The Commission came under severe pressure from the State Government of Dr Farooq Abdullah to ensure that the overall majority allotments to the Valley were not damaged and that the status-quo in the imbalance was maintained.

The Wazir Commission, while staying quiet on the assembly seat ratios, held that three more districts be created in Jammu Region, at Reasi, Kishtwar and Bhau, and that there was no necessity for any changes in the Valley and Ladakh. This was over-ruled by the State government which felt that adding another three districts to Jammu would convey too much weightage to the region and create complications for them later. Instead, three new districts of Badgam, Kupwara and Baramulla in the Valley and a Shia-dominated district specifically created in Ladakh on the sensitive Srinagar-Leh Road at Kargil.

The Ladakh Buddhist Association vehemently protested against this discriminatory and potentially dangerous act of unnecessarily carving out of a Shia District in Ladakh. Dr Farooq Abdullah’s sop of granting two additional MLA seats for Ladakh did not satisfy the Ladakhi people, who fully supported by the Jammu Region, commenced a determined agitation with strikes, administrative logjams and representations to the Central government. It was indeed a fortunate circumstance that immediately thereafter, President Rule came into operation in J&K. The Ladakh Region’s Autonomous Hill Council status was approved, something which could never have happened under the National Conference government.

Additionally, for reasons unknown, the Valley returns representatives to the Lok Sabha as MP’s, at the rate of one per 10 lac people, whereas Jammu and Ladakh regions have reps respectively in the Lok Sabha at the rate of one per 14 lakh people. This is a further political imbalance based on incorrect norms. The Gajendragadkar Commission in its 1986 Report made many detailed comments on the discrimination shown and its after effects. Unfortunately matters were allowed to drift. Even the Sarkaria Commission failed to spot this weightage since it was being fed with inputs from the state government and given no special aspects to consider.

In the Future Contest

From all these observations, it can be seen how legislative manipulation has ensured that the Valley has dominated the entire geographical territory of J&K State. There can be no gain saying the fact that overtly and covertly, the Valley based leadership, have aimed at, practiced unhindered, and brazenly endorsed the fact of Kashmir valley precedence in all the three regions, despite geographic, demographic, cultural factors dictating otherwise. This has been done by passing legislation at will, and then claiming it represented the people’s wishes as expressed in the State Legislative.

Under the present allocation of MLA seats, the overwhelming legislative majority is with the Valley, Already this excessive majority element in the Assembly has created problems through embarrassing resolutions time and again.

The Valley only does not comprise J&K State. What is suitable to the Valley, does not necessarily endorse itself to being suitable for the other two regions. The existing dichtomy needs to be corrected at the earliest by the creation of equally balanced representation within the State Legislative Assembly. Only this can give the other two provinces of J&K a chance to fulfill there aspirations without being legislatively overshadowed and dominated. The demand for trifurcation is based on these incontroversial facts and hence needs to be addressed at this crucial stage. The imbalance must be corrected so that adjustments fit into our future plans for the State.

“Devolution talks” should be to enforce better governance and specifically decentralization of powers, presently totally with the Valley; definitely not to jeopardies our security, solidarity and integrity. Devolution of powers must also re-adjust the seat allotments rationally and not pamper to or promote secessionist ideas based on long term plans of anti-India groups. Further concessions of any kind whatsoever will not change the ground situation as a bench-mark has already been reached. Any further erosion of the Valley’s tenuous relationship with the Indian union must not be allowed under any circumstances whatsoever.

Previous

Index

Next