As Article 370 hearings begin in the Supreme Court, question of the ‘temporary’ provision

Source: The post is based on the article “As Article 370 hearings begin in the Supreme Court, question of the ‘temporary’ provision” published in “The Indian express” on 3rd August 2023.

Syllabus: GS2- Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure,

News: The article discusses the debate on Article 370, which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir. The Supreme Court is examining if its 2019 removal was legal.

What are the arguments in favor of removing Article 370?

Temporary Provision: Article 370 is titled “Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”. This suggests it wasn’t meant to be permanent.

Self-contained Exit: Article 370(3) allows for the President to declare the article inoperative, indicating a mechanism for its removal.

Uniformity: Removal can lead to uniform application of Indian laws to Jammu & Kashmir, integrating it fully with India.

Development & Growth: Some believe removal can boost the region’s development, as it would get equal attention and opportunities like other states.

What are the arguments against removing Article 370?

Original Agreement: The accession of Jammu & Kashmir to India was based on certain terms, with Article 370 being central.

“Temporary” Misunderstood: The term “temporary” in Article 370 refers to the period before J&K’s Constituent Assembly created its Constitution (1951-1957), not the Article’s lifespan.

Constituent Assembly’s Role: Clause (3) of Article 370 mandated that any change to the relationship between J&K and India needed the J&K Constituent Assembly’s recommendation.

End of Constituent Assembly: Since the Constituent Assembly ceased to exist after 1957, the power to alter Article 370 also ended, making the Article permanent.

Preservation of Identity: Article 370 ensured J&K maintained its unique identity and relationship with India.

Collaborative Relationship: The petitioners saw Article 370 as fostering a collaborative relationship between J&K and India. Removing it could disturb this balance.