It`s A Long Road To Autonomy

Farooq has himself admitted that it may take close to three years before the contentious issue is resolved. This has not gone down well with some of his colleagues in the National Conference (NC) who hold the view that autonomy should not be delayed and they accuse Farooq of dilly-dallying. Says a Farooq aide: "We have the draft proposals with us and the Centre is already committed to grant maximum autonomy to the state. The issue can be sorted out in just three sittings. Why should we make people wait for years?" It may be an idyllic wish to expect autonomy for state to be formalised as easily as that. Not only has the question of Centre-state links to be codified, there also remains the question of internal autonomy for the three regions in the state—Jammu, Ladakh and the Valley. Farooq has promised to tackle the regional autonomy question at the state level itself, leaving the task of defining the Centre-state relationship to the Karan Singh committee.

For the National Conference, the choice of Karan Singh is both pragmatic and symbolic, intended to give the autonomy drive credibility all over the state. For one, Karan Singh is the son of Maharaja Hari Singh, the last ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. His association with the NC is significant in that Farooq’s father Sheikh Abdullah and Hari Singh were bitter rivals. The two leaders buried the hatchet before elections and Karan Singh’s son, Ajatshatru, who contested on an NC ticket, is in Farooq’s cabinet. Says an NC leader from Jammu: "The coming together of the two families has helped the National Conference image. It’s no longer seen as a party with its primary interest focussed in the Valley." Sources close to Singh say he sees Farooq as a reasonable human being who is very transparent and forthcoming. Therefore, it was Singh who gave the go-ahead to his son to join the National Conference. He himself campaigned for the NC in the assembly elections. So there are those in the party who feel the mutual trust between Farooq and Karan Singh, who enjoys considerable goodwill among the Hindus, makes the latter a natural choice to head a committee on autonomy.

So far so good. But bottlenecks are inevitable. Concretising an autonomy package doesn’t sound as easy as NC leaders made it out to be. The party has been steadfast in its resolve for the restoration of the constitutional status which Jammu and Kashmir enjoyed in 1952. The cut-off line is the Delhi Agreement signed between Sheikh Abdullah and the Centre. This 1952 document, which spells out the relationship between the state and the Union, was duly ratified by Parliament and the J&K constituent assembly.

No one in the NC wants Far-ooq to compromise on this cutoff date. They see most of the later constitutional orders and the 1975 agreement between Sheikh Abdullah and Indira Gandhi as unworthy of consideration.

Says Abdul Ahad Vakil, senior party leader and revenue minister: "Kashmir’s autonomy is different from the federal structure being demanded by other states. We have been promised a distinct status within the Indian union and there are constitutional guarantees. What we stand for is the complete restoration of the Delhi agreement in its real spirit. All encroachments made upon this in subsequent years shall have to go." He adds the validity of orders passed by the President vis-a-vis J&K will have to be reviewed and the assembly should be given the right to reject orders that violate the Delhi Agreement spirit.

This agreement, which the NC has made the bottomline of its political manifesto, is in a way an improvement upon the Instrument of Accession signed by Hari Singh, which restricted the Central role in J&K to three areas—defence, communications and foreign affairs. Since the agreement was ratified by Parliament, the NC feels this constitutional guarantee must be restored in the autonomy package.

The main features of the Delhi Agreement was that the head of state or governor (Sadr-e-Riyasat) would be elected by the two houses of the state legislature and not appointed by the President. Other than this, the state would have its own flag; the Supreme Court would only have appellate jurisdiction; and, in civil matters, prior permission of the state high court would be required for moving the appellate court. The agreement also made a provision for common citizenship but with special privileges to the people of J&K; and application of fundamental rights to the state, subject to certain modifications, especially to ensure implementation of the state’s programme of land to the tiller with no compensation to the landlords.

HOWEVER, since the early ’60s, the erosion of the state’s autonomy began with many Central laws being extended there. Moreover, this was done ignoring the fulfilment of necessary legal and statutory requirements. At times, the extension of laws failed to serve any purpose. Points out a senior minister in Farooq’s cabinet: "How do you justify the extension of the Navigation Act to Jammu and Kashmir when we have no sea? Doesn’t it seem ridiculous!" The extension of Article 356, which provides for imposition of President’s rule in case of breakdown of constitutional machinery in the state, is also a point resented by NC leaders. Asks Mohammad Shafi, a minister and architect of the NC’s blueprint for autonomy: "Why was Article 356 needed when Section 92 of the J&K Constitution provides for a better method to deal with such situations, in so far as fresh assembly polls have to take place within six months?" Similarly, the action of former governor Jagmohan in extending Article 249 is also being questioned. This Article empowers Rajya Sabha to pass a motion giving Parliament powers to legislate on subjects pertaining to Jammu and Kashmir when an assembly is not in place.

However, can Farooq get a clearcut commitment from the Centre on winning back what was spelt out in the Delhi Agreement? Working to the advantage of the chief minister is the fact that he has friends in the federally-oriented United Front, especially in the Left parties which have been backing him on the autonomy issue. Also, the UF Government has spelt out its commitment to give maximum autonomy. Trouble is, drafting a new package is likely to take time and the patience of the people may wear thin.

The task before the Karan Singh committee is considerable. A section within the National Conference is not happy with Singh being roped in by Farooq. Their reasoning is that it was Karan Singh who, as Sadr-e-Riyasat, struck the first blow against autonomy by dismissing the Sheikh Abdullah government in 1953. But the dominant mood at the moment is one of optimism—most would like to forget the past and start afresh. That’s precisely what Karan Singh hopes to do, says a source close to him. He does not wish to think about 1952 or 1975, but of 1996 and beyond. Which, indeed, could be good news.