What is Article 371(K), and what could it mean for Ladakh?

UPSC Syllabus: Gs Paper 2- Issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure, devolution of powers and finances up to local levels and challenges therein.

Introduction

The Centre has proposed Article 371(K) as a new constitutional safeguard for Ladakh, with a directly elected UT-level body and legislative powers. The proposal seeks to address long-standing demands for greater democratic control and protection of land, culture, environment and natural resources. However, no detailed draft has been provided, leaving major questions over executive, financial, planning, police and law-and-order powers.

Why Has Ladakh Been Seeking Constitutional Protection?

1. 2019 reorganisation of J&K: In 2019, the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir was reorganised, and Ladakh became a separate Union Territory without a legislative assembly.
2. Loss of elected representation: Ladakh had four MLAs in the erstwhile J&K Assembly, but after becoming a UT without a legislature, its administration became largely bureaucratic.
3. Change in political expectations: Leh had long demanded UT status because it felt neglected by the erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir government, but the absence of a legislature later created concerns over democratic representation.
4. Concerns over land and identity: Changes in domicile rules increased concerns about land, employment, demography and protection of Ladakh’s distinct cultural identity.
5. Limited Hill Council powers: Ladakh has Hill Councils in Leh and Kargil, but neither is covered by the Sixth Schedule, leaving their powers limited.
6. Demand for stronger safeguards: These concerns led to demands for statehood, tribal status, Sixth Schedule protection and greater local control over administration, land and infrastructure decisions.

What Has the Centre Proposed Under Article 371(K)?

1. New constitutional provision: The Centre has proposed Article 371(K) under Part XXI, which contains temporary, transitional and special provisions for specific regions and states.
2. Article 371 and its present scope: Article 371 and provisions from 371-A to 371-J provide special arrangements for 12 States, covering different political, cultural, social and economic interests.
3. Directly elected UT body: The proposed arrangement would create a governing body for Ladakh whose members would be chosen through direct elections.
4. Legislative subjects: The body would have legislative powers over land, culture and language, forests, environment and natural resources.
5. Article 240 subjects: Its legislative role could also cover other subjects reserved for Ladakh under Article 240, which allows the President to make laws for specified Union Territories.
6. A new constitutional model for a UT: Article 371(K) would create a separate constitutional arrangement for Ladakh, marking a departure because existing special provisions under Article 371 apply to states.

How Would Article 371(K) Change Ladakh’s Governance?

1. Greater elected participation: A directly elected UT-level body would give local representatives a formal role in Ladakh’s governance and decision-making.
2. Local role in resource decisions: Legislative powers over land, forests, environment and natural resources would give the proposed body a role in decisions concerning these areas.
3. Protection of cultural interests: Legislative authority over culture and language would provide a constitutional basis for addressing Ladakh’s distinct cultural interests.
4. Shift from bureaucratic administration: The proposed elected body is intended to increase democratic control in Ladakh, where administration has largely been led by bureaucrats since 2019.

What Is the Difference Between Article 371(K) and the Sixth Schedule?

1. Sixth Schedule framework: The Sixth Schedule creates Autonomous District Councils with constitutionally defined legislative, judicial and administrative powers within states.
2. Subjects under Sixth Schedule: These councils can regulate matters including land, forests, water, agriculture, village councils, health, inheritance, social customs and mining.
3. Present geographical scope: The Sixth Schedule applies to tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura.
4. Ladakh’s earlier recommendation: The National Commission for Scheduled Tribes recommended Sixth Schedule protection for Ladakh in 2019, citing its tribal population and distinct cultural heritage.
5. Tribal protection remains distinct: With 97% of Ladakh’s population being tribal, people have demanded Sixth Schedule protection to give local councils greater autonomy to protect the region’s environment and culture.
6. Different institutional model: Article 371(K) proposes a directly elected UT-level body with specified legislative powers, rather than Sixth Schedule-style autonomous district institutions.
7. Separate constitutional route: The proposal would create a distinct arrangement for Ladakh, while its exact difference from the Sixth Schedule depends on the final draft.

What Powers and Demands Remain Unresolved?

1. No detailed draft yet: Ladakh representatives have not received a draft specifying the proposed body’s powers, making the Centre’s offer incomplete in their view.
2. Executive authority unclear: It remains unsettled whether the elected body would exercise executive powers or have supremacy over the existing bureaucracy in governance.
3. Financial and planning powers: Ladakh has sought budgetary, financial and planning powers, but their scope under the proposed arrangement remains undecided.
4. Police and law and order: Representatives have sought control over police and law and order, while the Centre has only agreed to discuss these demands in October.
5. Limits on Lieutenant Governor: The Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) want no major decisions on administration, bureaucracy or land until constitutional safeguards and the elected body are established.
6. Protection against irreversible changes: They oppose major irreversible restructuring of governance mechanisms and land transfers before the proposed democratic arrangement is firmly established.
7. Relief after 2025 violence: The groups have sought compensation for victims and withdrawal of criminal cases against 80 protesters connected with the September 24, 2025 violence.
8. Timeline for legislation: Ladakh representatives want legislation passed during the Winter Session, while further talks and discussion of a draft Article are expected in October.

Conclusion

Article 371(K) could provide Ladakh with a distinct constitutional framework and greater democratic control over key local matters. However, its actual significance will depend on the powers finally given to the elected body, especially over bureaucracy, finance, planning, police and law and order. The proposed draft and further October discussions will therefore be crucial to settling the scope of Ladakh’s constitutional safeguards.

Question for practice:

Discuss the proposed Article 371(K) and its significance for Ladakh.

Source: Indian Express