Statehood to take time, but J&K ready for polls: Centre

On Tuesday, the Constitution bench asked the Centre to indicate if there was a time frame for granting statehood to J&K, underlining that restoration of democracy in the region was “very important”

The Union government on Thursday refrained from committing to an “exact time frame” for granting statehood to Jammu & Kashmir even as it told the Supreme Court that it is ready for election to the legislative assembly of the Union territory (UT) “any time now” and that this could take place whenever the state and the central election commissions decide.

HT Image

Political parties National Conference, People’s Conference and Apni Party said they were disappointed over the Centre’s statement in Supreme Court giving no timeline to restoration of statehood . Spokespersons for the three claimed there was nothing new in what the Union government told the Supreme Court.

Responding to the queries raised by a five-judge Constitution bench earlier in the week, the Centre maintained that the UT status of J&K is “temporary”, but it cannot put forth a specific time frame on when J&K will become a state again in the wake of “extremely extraordinary” history of J&K.

“We are dealing with an extremely extraordinary situation here. It (J&K) will have to be infused with several things before it can become a state again. Those actions have been initiated...it is progressing towards the statehood, but I am unable to give an exact time frame,” solicitor general Tushar Mehta told the bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud.

As the court heard the matter of the abrogation of Article 370 and the restructuring of J&K into two Union territories, the law officer listed out investment schemes and other initiatives, besides stressing on reduction in the incidents of terror and stone-pelting to state that the central government can take measures to improve the situation in J&K only if it remains a UT for some time.

“I am unable to give an exact time period right now about the complete statehood while saying that UT status is temporary. Because of the peculiar circumstances that the state had passed through with repeated and consistent disturbances for decades, it might take some time,” the S-G submitted before the bench, which also comprised justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Bhushan R Gavai and Surya Kant.

At the same time, Mehta said the Centre is ready for J&K to go to polls and that it is for the election commissions to take a call. “Updating of voters’ list is almost done. Some parts remain, which, I am told, the state election commission can complete in a month or so. Thereafter, they (election commissions) will take a decision, considering the overall situation,” said the S-G, adding J&K has all the trappings of a state except that police and law and order have been entrusted with the central government keeping in view the extraordinary security situations in the UT.

On Tuesday, the Constitution bench asked the Centre to indicate if there was a time frame for granting statehood to J&K, underlining that restoration of democracy in the region was “very important”, prompting the Centre to respond that it would come back in 48 hours with a “positive statement” on the issue. “The government has to make that statement before us that its (J&K’s) progression back to state has to take place. It cannot be a Union territory (UT) in permanence... Restoration of democracy is very important. It’s a surviving component for our nation,”the bench observed on the day.

Responding, S-G Mehta on Thursday began by saying that the central government is ready for elections in J&K “at any time now”, and he added that there are three polls which are due in J&K – three-tier panchayat elections, municipal elections, and the legislative election.

“I am disappointed not because of J&K but partly because of the judiciary. This is the highest pedestal of the judiciary and if they ask a question and the answer is the same, as ambiguous as it was four years back, as evasive as it was four years back, then I think it is a matter of concern,” People’s Conference president Sajad Gani Lone said .

National Conference spokesperson Imran Nabi Dar said that the party went to the Supreme Court with the aim of ”striking down Aug 05, 2019 decisions as unconstitutional and to reinstate the Aug 04 status quo”.

“Despite our consistent stance that the restoration of democratic rights and a legitimate elected body cannot be further delayed, the Solicitor General’s statement intends to minimize and divert attention from the core issue, trying to simplify it to a mere call for elections. Regardless, there is no novelty in the statement. It echoes what they’ve been asserting for all these years,” Dar said.

People’s Democratic Party chief spokesperson Suhail Bukhari said that the question of statehood or elections was not a priority for them but the special status of J&K. He said that after the Centre’s statement on elections, all eyes will be on the Election Commission.

“So far the Election Commission and BJP have been throwing the ball into each other’s courts regarding the conduct of elections. Now after the government’s statement in the Supreme Court, it will be interesting to see what the Election commission will do. Our stand has been that the Election Commission has worked as an extension of BJP,” Bukhari said.

On the thirteenth day of the argument in the matter, the bench heard the submissions of attorney general R Venkataramani and senior counsel Harish Salve and Rakesh Dwivedi in defence of the abrogation. The senior lawyers emphasised that Article 370 was a temporary provision that had to be extinguished sooner or later and that the President had the uncircumscribed authority to end it. The court will continue hearing the case on Friday.

The bench is seized of a raft of petitions, filed by parliamentarians from the National Conference party, Kashmiri citizens, former bureaucrats and various organisations that have laid the challenge to the abrogation of Article 370 soon after the presidential order in August 2019. On July 3, the Supreme Court notified the setting up of a new Constitution bench, comprising its five most senior judges, that began day-to-day hearing in the case from August 2.

(Ashiq Hussain in Srinagar contribiuted to this report)