Article 370 of the Indian Constitution deals with the special status given to the state of Jammu & Kashmir. It provides a fairly high degree of autonomy to the state, enables the state to have its own constitution (unique in an Indian context) which permits the state to give some special privileges to its "permanent residents". One such special privilege is that only a permanent resident can buy land in the state and citizens from other Indian states face some restrictions.
The article was enacted with much displeasure to India's founding fathers such as Sardar Patel and Babsaheb Ambedkar. It is a very controversial topic as the region is an international hotspot and the state is the only muslim-majority state in India.
Historic background
In 1947, as the British were leaving India they gave the various Indian princes the right to choose their destiny. This would have led to 100+ nations in the subcontinent. India had an iron man (Sardar Patel) who wouldn't let this happen and deftly arm-twisted hundreds of these kings & princes into forming the Union of India.
However, there was one sticking point - Kashmir. The Maharajah of this region wanted to stay alone, completely ignorant of the geopolitics around him. Pakistan forcefully tried to take control of his independent nation and without any option left he chose to join India in October 1947.
Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir). After joining India, the Maharajah appointed
Sheikh Abdullah as the Prime Minister of Kashmir.
Constituent AssemblyWhen it came to drafting the Indian constituion, Nehru brought in
N. Gopalaswami Ayyangar - an ex-Prime Minister of Kashmir to draw the relevant clauses and articles. Nehru was himself a Kashmiri Pandit and together this duo was allegedly biased towards Kashmir. They gave Sheikh Abdullah almost everything he wanted.
While Sardar Patel was able to integrate the rest of India quite easily, he was sidelined on the Kashmir issue. Here is what Nehru said:
Gopalaswamy Ayyangar has been especially asked to help in Kashmir matters. Both for this reason and because of his intimate knowledge and experience of Kashmir, he had to be given full latitude. I really do not know where the States Ministry (Sardar Patel’s ministry) comes into the picture except that it should be kept informed for [sic] the steps taken.
Ayyangar argued that Kashmir was not fully integrated, a third of the state was still in occupation of Pakistan and the matter was with UN Security Council. Thus, he said there must be special provisions for Kashmir as a stopgap until the state is ready for full integration. Nehru was in the US at the time of framing Article 370 and fully left the matter to Mr. Ayyangar while the constituent assmbly was in uproar.
Special provisions
As originally envisaged, Article 370 gave Jammu & Kashmir complete control over their destiny (except when it comes to matters of defense and diplomacy, where Indian government had control). Fundamental rights and duties, directive principles of the state policy and even the supremacy of the Indian Supreme Court didn't apply to the state. The state had its own constitution and own flag.
Along with Article 35A of the Indian Constitution, it allows the state to prefer the J&K "citizens" for:
- Employment under the State Government;
- Acquisition of immovable property in the State;
- Settlement in the State;
- Right to scholarships and such other forms of aid as State Government may provide.
However, since 1950 Indian government slowly eroded on the state's autonomy (giving Supreme Court jurisdiction over the state and made most of the Union laws applicable to the state). Presently, most institutions of the Government of India apply to the state as a result of
The Delhi Agreement, 1952. In 2002, the J&K High court has ruled that daughters of the state would continue to be permanent residents even after marrying people from outside the state (sons always had this right).
Controversy: The key sticking point is that the citizens from others parts of India cannot easily migrate to Kashmir nor acquire land in the state. Only "Permanent Residents" of the state can acquire property and other Indians cannot become permanent residents.
The state prides in being unique this way and there is a claim that such "uniqueness" breeds further separatism. However, others feel that such a major change would breed further resentment and build more separatism.
India should focus on more pressing issues. The consequence of repealing the article might push the state back on to trouble just when peace is visiting it. Article 370 is fairly irrelevant in the lives of the most of the rest of India, while it is sacrosanct for the Kashmiris. The autonomy has already been eroded for the most part and what remains is just a facade. It is in India's interests to keep the facade for a while longer until the Kashmiris get more economically integrated with rest of India. Thus, there is more trouble in removing it without providing sufficient benefits to the nation. India has no pressing issues now.
Modi has other ways to integrate the state with rest of India. This would involve removing many of the war-like provisions, improving road & rail connectivity and surcharging the local economy. Enemies of Modi, both India and abroad, are waiting for that one mistake to change public opinion and they will use it to scuttle his campaign promises. Already the Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir talks of the state leaving India. We don't want any more trouble.
There is only one thing I would say about repealing Article 370: "Not today".
Take time to go through this great article:
Understanding Article 370
For a contrarian view from a military perspective:
