By: Balraj Puri
There have been recent demands for the release of the report of interlocutors appointed by the Government of India on Jammu and Kashmir. Some unofficial leaks suggest that the interlocutors have recognized special position of the state and special problems for the regions within the state.
Regional tensions continues to be as serious a problem of Jammu and Kashmir state as it used to be before independence. Before 1947, Hindu and Muslim leadership of Jammu tended to unite behind the Dogra Maharaja and supported his desire for an independent state. The people of Kashmir, in an unusual display of communal harmony, overwhelmingly supported Sheikh Abdullah's decision to accede to the Indian Union.
The State did not join India's democratic march towards power to the people in which regional identities found satisfactory status, in the form of a separate State, merger with other States, Union territory, regional autonomy union territory or some other form. The J&K State was not considered fit for any such arrangement in view of international aspects of its problem. The State was also kept out of the experiment of democratic decentralization on account of the same reason. Thus its people were denied the benefit of Panchayati Raj system till the present year.
By now it has become evident that institutional changes to satisfy political, developmental and cultural aspirations can be delayed only at their peril as many complications have been added to the problem of J&K by neglecting the genuine urges of the people. Many commissions of enquiry have submitted their reports. But for lack of an objective discussion on them, the problem is getting complicated.
Before 1947, the people of Kashmir, were engaged in a struggle under Sheikh Abdullah's leadership, against what was called Dogra Raj because the Maharaja was a Dogra. After independence, people of the other two regions tend to attribute all their problems to what they call Kashmiri Raj. The political power was exercised by National Conference what was mostly based in the Kashmir Valley. The authoritarian nature of the new regime made them all the more unbearable.
It has become normal practice for leaders of the present government to reiterate its policy of giving equitable treatment to every part of the state. But assurance of equitable treatment are not enough. There should be an equitable and objective criteria to measure that all parts and communities of the state are equitably treated. The Gajendragadkar commission which thoroughly dealt with the regional problems in the state formed in 1967 observed.
"even if all matters were equitably settled, we feel that there would still be a measure of discontent unless the political aspirations of the different regions of the State are satisfied. In fact we consider that the main cause of irritation and tension is the feeling of political neglect and discrimination, real or imagined, from which certain regions of the state suffer".
The Commission which theoretically conceded that the principle of regional autonomy may lead to "greater consolidation of the region (Jammu) with the rest of the state", rejected the demand for lack of support for it in the Jammu region.
The Commission, should have made their final judgments primarily on the merits of the case and not on degree of popular support in one or the other region. However, there are enough indications that the idea of regional autonomy is better appreciated now and there is no noticeable opposition to it. Even if the mandate that the National Conference received in the assembly elections of 1996 is not interpreted as a decisive popular verdict on the issue of regional autonomy (which was a part of its election manifesto), the extensive tour of the State by the present writer and his wide ranging discussions with people belonging to different ethnic and religious communities and different parts of the state with different political view points have given him enough feed back of the ground realities and basic articulated and un-articulated urges of the people. The recommendations that follow fully take into account popular urges as also his own understanding of what is in the best interest of all communities, regions and sub-regions of the state.
Much damage has been done to the interests of the state and to its each region by the form tensions between its regions have taken. The BJP has been carrying on its campaign for what it called abrogation of Article 370 of the constitution and started an agitation for it in 1952. It divided the public opinion between full and limited accession which made the accession issue itself debatable and is recognized as the principal cause of the crisis of 1953 when Sheikh Abdullah was dismissed from power and arrested.
However there have been many voices in favour of the principle of regional autonomy in Jammu regions as well in Kashmir valley now time to time. I have supported special status of the state within India and special status of the regions within the state.
The first official acceptance of the idea was made by the Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru on 24th July, 1952, in the presence of Sheikh Abdullah, at a press conference in New Delhi, when he said that "the State Government was considering regional autonomy within the larger state". Later the Sheikh gave an assurance separately to the effect that "the constitution of the state, when completed would give regional autonomy, particularly in cultural affairs to Jammu and Ladakh". Though Bhartiya Jana Sangh initially opposed it, its founder President Dr. Shayama Prasad Mukerjee veered around to this view. In a letter to the Prime Minister Nehru on 17th February, 1953, he offered to withdraw the then ongoing Praja Parishad (its Jammu affiliate) agitation in Jammu and accept the Delhi agreement if the principle of autonomy would "apply to the province of Jammu as a whole and of course also to Ladakh and Kashmir Valley". However, the Jana Sangh changed its stand a few months after the death of Dr. Mukerjee and continued to condemn this demand as anti national.
Sheikh Abdullah reiterated the decision of the government to "give autonomy to the different cultural units of the state as would be provided in the constitution that is being drawn up". Broadcasting from Radio Kashmir, Srinagar on 17th April, 1953 he said "this removes all the fears of domination of one unit over the other and will make for the voluntary unity and consolidation of the people of the state. Government was considering grant of autonomy to its regions, particularly Jammu, while framing the constitution of the State." Later a sub-committee of the state constituent assembly comprising M/s D.P Dhar, Syed Mir Qasim and G.L Dogra, recommended "a substantial measure of autonomy for each region with power of taxation and legislation".
Prem Nath Bazaz, one of the most ardent champion of Kashmiri nationalism, supported the proposal of regional autonomy. In his book Kashmir in Crucible (1967), he wrote "the best way of satisfying different aspirations of the state is to reorganize it as a regional federation. The reorganized state will have three constitutional units and each of them can have equal status not subordinate to one another. A number of essential subjects of common interest would be assigned to the regional federation leaving the rest of the state functions to the constituent units."
Shamim Ahmed Shamim, the celebrated journalist, writer, intellectual, M.P and editor of the popular Srinagar Weekly-Aina said on 19th, November, 1967, "as I attach great importance to protection of autonomy, individuality and personality of Kashmir, I have deep interest in the programme and objective of the Jammu Autonomy Forum. Far from wanting to divide the State, it wants to restore the mutual relations between Jammu and Kashmir on healthy and stable basis". As an MLA, Shamim also gave a notice of moving a constitutional amendment bill in the state assembly incorporating the principal of regional autonomy. Khawaja Mubarak Shah a Former Minister in Abdullah's cabinet before 1953, while presiding over a meeting of the Jammu Autonomy Forum, asserted that "the people of the valley are not opposed to regional autonomy". While proposing a federal structure for the state, he held its unitary form responsible for many of its problems. Almost all Chief Ministers of the state have supported the principle of regional autonomy, before and after being in power.
A trial may be made without too radical changes in the present arrangement. Many regional grievances would be removed if an objective criteria can be added to what is being called an equitable basis for sanctioning grants to regions. For unless grants are distributed under an objective formula, their would remain grounds for discrimination.
A eight point formula is suggested below to make the allocation of funds objective easily verifiable even by a common. It may include: i) population, ii) area, iii) Road mileage; surface road divided by area, iv) Share in govt jobs as percentage of population in the relevant age group, v) Average annual admission in last five years to technical institutions as percentage of population in the relevant age group, vi) female literacy, vii) infant mortality, viii) some performance incentive criteria like contribution to the state revenue in proportion to region's income.
While criteria i), ii) and viii) should be positive, the rest may be negative.
Total receipts of the State be shared with the regions in 50:50 ratio. Out of the share of the state 5% be allocated to the regions on the discretion of the state govt. to meet contingencies, natural calamities and special needs of some areas in addition to the regional share of revenue. Subsequent State Finance Commissions may use further sophistications to measure deprivation gaps in various fields between regions and add different weights to the indices or even increase the number of indices if relevant data are available by that time. If Jammu and Kashmir State, the richest state of India in its diversities, can discover its potential and resolve its problem of regional tensions, it can open up opportunities for a major break through in radical growth of India in many fields and can also provide a lesson to resolve other complex and complicated political conflicts elsewhere.
There have been recent demands for the release of the report of interlocutors appointed by the Government of India on Jammu and Kashmir. Some unofficial leaks suggest that the interlocutors have recognized special position of the state and special problems for the regions within the state.
Regional tensions continues to be as serious a problem of Jammu and Kashmir state as it used to be before independence. Before 1947, Hindu and Muslim leadership of Jammu tended to unite behind the Dogra Maharaja and supported his desire for an independent state. The people of Kashmir, in an unusual display of communal harmony, overwhelmingly supported Sheikh Abdullah's decision to accede to the Indian Union.
The State did not join India's democratic march towards power to the people in which regional identities found satisfactory status, in the form of a separate State, merger with other States, Union territory, regional autonomy union territory or some other form. The J&K State was not considered fit for any such arrangement in view of international aspects of its problem. The State was also kept out of the experiment of democratic decentralization on account of the same reason. Thus its people were denied the benefit of Panchayati Raj system till the present year.
By now it has become evident that institutional changes to satisfy political, developmental and cultural aspirations can be delayed only at their peril as many complications have been added to the problem of J&K by neglecting the genuine urges of the people. Many commissions of enquiry have submitted their reports. But for lack of an objective discussion on them, the problem is getting complicated.
Before 1947, the people of Kashmir, were engaged in a struggle under Sheikh Abdullah's leadership, against what was called Dogra Raj because the Maharaja was a Dogra. After independence, people of the other two regions tend to attribute all their problems to what they call Kashmiri Raj. The political power was exercised by National Conference what was mostly based in the Kashmir Valley. The authoritarian nature of the new regime made them all the more unbearable.
It has become normal practice for leaders of the present government to reiterate its policy of giving equitable treatment to every part of the state. But assurance of equitable treatment are not enough. There should be an equitable and objective criteria to measure that all parts and communities of the state are equitably treated. The Gajendragadkar commission which thoroughly dealt with the regional problems in the state formed in 1967 observed.
"even if all matters were equitably settled, we feel that there would still be a measure of discontent unless the political aspirations of the different regions of the State are satisfied. In fact we consider that the main cause of irritation and tension is the feeling of political neglect and discrimination, real or imagined, from which certain regions of the state suffer".
The Commission which theoretically conceded that the principle of regional autonomy may lead to "greater consolidation of the region (Jammu) with the rest of the state", rejected the demand for lack of support for it in the Jammu region.
The Commission, should have made their final judgments primarily on the merits of the case and not on degree of popular support in one or the other region. However, there are enough indications that the idea of regional autonomy is better appreciated now and there is no noticeable opposition to it. Even if the mandate that the National Conference received in the assembly elections of 1996 is not interpreted as a decisive popular verdict on the issue of regional autonomy (which was a part of its election manifesto), the extensive tour of the State by the present writer and his wide ranging discussions with people belonging to different ethnic and religious communities and different parts of the state with different political view points have given him enough feed back of the ground realities and basic articulated and un-articulated urges of the people. The recommendations that follow fully take into account popular urges as also his own understanding of what is in the best interest of all communities, regions and sub-regions of the state.
Much damage has been done to the interests of the state and to its each region by the form tensions between its regions have taken. The BJP has been carrying on its campaign for what it called abrogation of Article 370 of the constitution and started an agitation for it in 1952. It divided the public opinion between full and limited accession which made the accession issue itself debatable and is recognized as the principal cause of the crisis of 1953 when Sheikh Abdullah was dismissed from power and arrested.
However there have been many voices in favour of the principle of regional autonomy in Jammu regions as well in Kashmir valley now time to time. I have supported special status of the state within India and special status of the regions within the state.
The first official acceptance of the idea was made by the Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru on 24th July, 1952, in the presence of Sheikh Abdullah, at a press conference in New Delhi, when he said that "the State Government was considering regional autonomy within the larger state". Later the Sheikh gave an assurance separately to the effect that "the constitution of the state, when completed would give regional autonomy, particularly in cultural affairs to Jammu and Ladakh". Though Bhartiya Jana Sangh initially opposed it, its founder President Dr. Shayama Prasad Mukerjee veered around to this view. In a letter to the Prime Minister Nehru on 17th February, 1953, he offered to withdraw the then ongoing Praja Parishad (its Jammu affiliate) agitation in Jammu and accept the Delhi agreement if the principle of autonomy would "apply to the province of Jammu as a whole and of course also to Ladakh and Kashmir Valley". However, the Jana Sangh changed its stand a few months after the death of Dr. Mukerjee and continued to condemn this demand as anti national.
Sheikh Abdullah reiterated the decision of the government to "give autonomy to the different cultural units of the state as would be provided in the constitution that is being drawn up". Broadcasting from Radio Kashmir, Srinagar on 17th April, 1953 he said "this removes all the fears of domination of one unit over the other and will make for the voluntary unity and consolidation of the people of the state. Government was considering grant of autonomy to its regions, particularly Jammu, while framing the constitution of the State." Later a sub-committee of the state constituent assembly comprising M/s D.P Dhar, Syed Mir Qasim and G.L Dogra, recommended "a substantial measure of autonomy for each region with power of taxation and legislation".
Prem Nath Bazaz, one of the most ardent champion of Kashmiri nationalism, supported the proposal of regional autonomy. In his book Kashmir in Crucible (1967), he wrote "the best way of satisfying different aspirations of the state is to reorganize it as a regional federation. The reorganized state will have three constitutional units and each of them can have equal status not subordinate to one another. A number of essential subjects of common interest would be assigned to the regional federation leaving the rest of the state functions to the constituent units."
Shamim Ahmed Shamim, the celebrated journalist, writer, intellectual, M.P and editor of the popular Srinagar Weekly-Aina said on 19th, November, 1967, "as I attach great importance to protection of autonomy, individuality and personality of Kashmir, I have deep interest in the programme and objective of the Jammu Autonomy Forum. Far from wanting to divide the State, it wants to restore the mutual relations between Jammu and Kashmir on healthy and stable basis". As an MLA, Shamim also gave a notice of moving a constitutional amendment bill in the state assembly incorporating the principal of regional autonomy. Khawaja Mubarak Shah a Former Minister in Abdullah's cabinet before 1953, while presiding over a meeting of the Jammu Autonomy Forum, asserted that "the people of the valley are not opposed to regional autonomy". While proposing a federal structure for the state, he held its unitary form responsible for many of its problems. Almost all Chief Ministers of the state have supported the principle of regional autonomy, before and after being in power.
A trial may be made without too radical changes in the present arrangement. Many regional grievances would be removed if an objective criteria can be added to what is being called an equitable basis for sanctioning grants to regions. For unless grants are distributed under an objective formula, their would remain grounds for discrimination.
A eight point formula is suggested below to make the allocation of funds objective easily verifiable even by a common. It may include: i) population, ii) area, iii) Road mileage; surface road divided by area, iv) Share in govt jobs as percentage of population in the relevant age group, v) Average annual admission in last five years to technical institutions as percentage of population in the relevant age group, vi) female literacy, vii) infant mortality, viii) some performance incentive criteria like contribution to the state revenue in proportion to region's income.
While criteria i), ii) and viii) should be positive, the rest may be negative.
Total receipts of the State be shared with the regions in 50:50 ratio. Out of the share of the state 5% be allocated to the regions on the discretion of the state govt. to meet contingencies, natural calamities and special needs of some areas in addition to the regional share of revenue. Subsequent State Finance Commissions may use further sophistications to measure deprivation gaps in various fields between regions and add different weights to the indices or even increase the number of indices if relevant data are available by that time. If Jammu and Kashmir State, the richest state of India in its diversities, can discover its potential and resolve its problem of regional tensions, it can open up opportunities for a major break through in radical growth of India in many fields and can also provide a lesson to resolve other complex and complicated political conflicts elsewhere.
Comments
Post a Comment