Anil Gupta
Ignoring the Commission's fixed mandate, local parties raised superficial and irrelevant issues the Commission could neither address nor resolve
The successful completion of the all-party meeting held by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi has rung the bell for the resumption of the political process in Jammu & Kashmir. Modi told the attendees: “Our priority is to strengthen grassroots democracy in J&K. Delimitation has to happen at a quick pace so that polls can happen and J&K gets an elected government that gives strength to J&K's development trajectory.” Both he and Home Minister Amit Shah appealed to the parties to participate in the delimitation process.
The delimitation has been necessitated consequent to the reorganization of the state into two union territoriesunder the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 (referred to as the Act) which also increased the number of assembly seats by seven to a total of 90 seats. The J&K Delimitation Commission came into existence under provisions of Part V of the Act, passed by both houses of Parliament in August 2019. The delimitation is to be based on Census-2011. Political parties and social organizations have since woken up from deep slumber.The Delimitation Commission started immediate action.
To begin with, the response of the Kashmir-based political parties has been lukewarm to the extent that three associate members of the Commission belonging to the National Conference (NC) announced a boycott of the body. They claimed that they are against the Act and have appealed to the Supreme Court against it. Thus, any action taken under the provisions of the Act was “unconstitutional” till the Court gives its verdict.
The other members of the Gupkar Alliance echoed the same sentiments. But the PM's appeal to the Kashmiri leaders at the meeting appears to have had a magical effect with all parties except Mehbooba Mufti's PDP coming on board and agreeing to cooperate with the Commission. There are many voices in the Valley claiming to be legal experts, stating that there is no correlation between delimitation and elections. They demand full statehood followed by elections and delimitation thereafter. The demand does not hold ground because the erstwhile assembly of J&K was based on the Constitution of J&K which has become redundant after the revocation of Article 370. The State was further divided into two UTs with J&K having a legislative assembly with an increase in its strength. Hence, delimitation of fresh territorial constituencies before holding elections is necessary.
Their narrative has possibly been built to add confusion and avoid further alienation of the vast majority of the Kashmiris from them. The latter are already disillusioned with the constituents of the Gupkar Alliance for their frequent shifting of goalposts.
After hectic parleys at Delhi, the Commission announced a four-day visit to the UT to interact with political parties, social organizations, and the Deputy Commissioners of all 20 districts. However, instead of providing inputs to the Commission, the political parties and some social organizations used the occasion to appeal to their vote banks or for political jugglery. Ignoring the Commission's fixed mandate, they raised superficial and irrelevant issues the Commission could neither address nor resolve.
The mandate is unambiguous and that is to delineate 90 territorial constituencies for the new assembly of JKUT. It doesn't have the mandate to even disturb the status quo of the existing five parliamentary seats. Thus, demands like not basing the delimitation exercise on the 2011 census because of allegedly fudged population figures or de-freezing ofeight assembly seats reserved for POJK refugees are beyond the mandate of the Commission. Those demanding it also know that but for them, it is a matter of optics of putting across the views of certain aggrieved sections. Both the proposals need amendments to the Constitution by Parliament.
Similarly demands like reservations for a particular religious community, separate Jammu state, reservation for OBCs and Paharis, 50-50 formula, provision of security to political leaders of a particular party, fixing educational qualification of SC candidates, reservation or nomination of the minority population of Kashmir, seats for residents of border belt, Displaced Persons of 1947, and West Pakistan refugees are also beyond the mandate of the Commission. Interestingly, none demanded the reservation of seats for women.
It is not difficult to fathom the logic behind the statement of Peoples' Conference Chairman when he said that land, desert, stones donot need representation and population be the sole criteria for the delimitation. It is the urge to continue with the Kashmiri hegemony which was drawn by the Kashmiri leadership from gerrymandering of the territorial constituencies in 1951. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah with the full support of Jawahar Lal Nehru threw to the winds the then established principle of one assembly seat per 40,000 population and arbitrarily gave 30 seats to Jammu and 43 seats to the Kashmir province. This skewed distribution continued till the abrogation of 370 when the recently dissolved assembly had 46 seats for Kashmir and 37 for Jammu, four more than the half-way mark to form the government. The gross injustice done by the Sheikh led to political subjugation of Jammu which continued to suffer due to his deliberate act of promoting Kashmiri hegemony and supremacy as revenge against the Dogras.
The Sheikh ignored the purpose of delimitation, which is “to have equal representation to equal segments of the population to ensure a fair division of geographical areas so that all political parties or candidates contesting elections have a level playing field in terms the number of voters”. Thus, the NC representation to the Commission “to give due share to all parts of the Jammu region so that our commitment for equitable empowerment of all regions and sub-regions does not get dented” is full of deceit. Let alone sub-regions, was the NC ever fair to the Jammu and Ladakh regions? This sudden change of heart is nothing but a political gimmick.
Similarly, the Congress demand for restoration of full statehood has no relevance. Going beyond the Commission's mandate, it carries no logic as far as delimitation is concerned. Will return to statehood in any way change the geography and population the main factors to be considered for the delimitation?
It needs to be understood by all that the Commission is an independent body and the executive and political parties cannot interfere in its functioning.The parties trying to question its fairness and transparency are guilty of casting aspersions on and doubting the functioning of a constitutional body.
The Commission has accommodated all those who wanted to meet it despite many of them only interested in optics. The Commission is urged to take cognizance of the suggestion of the youngest party, Jammu & Kashmir Apni Party, and return to the UT again to visit remote and difficult areas, tehsil and district headquarters of sparsely-populated areas to get a first-hand account of the geography, topography and population composition.
Whatever may be the report of the Delimitation Commission, it is being awaited eagerly in both the regions of the UT. When the report is submitted to the Government, will itlead to the announcement of the likely dates of the much-awaited elections? As per my assessment, it would be later than sooner.
(The writer is a Jammu-based political commentator and security and strategic analyst. The views expressed are personal.)
