Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Mar 29: Various political parties while reacting sharply to the statement of Union Finance Minster, Arun Jaitley have said that the assertions of Union Finance Minister that Article 35 –A is Constitutionally vulnerable are not based on facts but misleading.
Reacting Jaitley’s statement Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) today said that the BJP is trying to convert Constitutional relationship between Jammu and Kashmir and the Union of India into an occupation.
“BJP is trying very hard to convert legal and Constitutional relationship between Jammu and Kashmir and the Union into an occupation through subterfuge and systemic subversion. It is unfortunate that Sangh Parivar has fielded one of the better known lawyers of the country to oppose the Supreme Court orders which have upheld Article-35-A not once but twice in the past,” said senior PDP leader and former Minister, Naeem Akhtar in a statement here.
He said it seems Sangh Parivar considers itself above the Supreme Court and that is why Jaitley has chosen to patronizingly pronounce that Article 35-A is Constitutionally vulnerable.
Akhtar said Jaitley, perhaps, needs not to be told that the framing and the approval of the Constitution and its development is not an isolated event but it has a political Constitutional history behind it which the Sang Parivar and some of their allies in the media try to overlook in pursuit of votes.
CPI M leader and four time MLA, Mohammed Yousf Tarigami while defending the Article said the statement of Jaitley that Article 35-A is “constitutionally vulnerable and is an impediment to the economic development of Jammu and Kashmir” reveals the real intentions of the Saffron party vis-à-vis special status of the State. They (BJP) are misrepresenting the Constitution and the State, he added in a rejoinder to BJP leader’s statement.
Why don’t BJP leaders come open and say whatever laws were passed by the then ruler of the State, Maharaja Hari Singh were wrong? State subject law was passed by the Maharaja in 1927 and it was incorporated in the Constitution through negotiations and carried forward. Is there anything new which the BJP wants to scrap?
Tarigami said the Maharaja acceded to India by signing the Instrument of Accession and surrendered only three subjects i.e External Affairs, Defense and Communication to the dominion of India while on all other subjects, the ruler of the State continued his sovereignty in and over the State by virtue of para(8) of the Instrument of Accession.
He said as such, Article 35-A flows inevitably from Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir enacted in 1956 has also put its seal on the relevant notification vide Clause 13. Those who challenge Article 35-A, conveniently forget that it was only Article 1 and Article 370 which were applicable to J&K at the time (1954), the Presidential order regarding addition of Article 35-A was made. As such, the Article 368 could not have been resorted to, for the addition of Article 35-A, he added.
While strongly reacting to Jaitley’s statement Jammu and Kashmir Pradesh Congress Committee, vice president and former MLC, G N Monga today said the BJP was trying to twist the historical facts for electoral gains.
In a statement Monga said, Jaitley himself is a renowned lawyer and must know the consequences of repealing Article 35A which is not the only Presidential Order which has been implemented.”
“BJP is showing its true colours by raking up controversial issues at the time of elections. Their arguments on Article 35A are weak and won’t work. Not only people of Kashmir region, but people of Jammu and Ladakh regions too will resist any move by the BJP to revoke Article 35-A tooth and nail as it is equally beneficial for the people of all the regions of the State,” he said.