Article 370

Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) has the distinction of being the only State in the Indian Union that negotiated its terms of accession. The result of the parleys, spread over months, between the Central and State leaderships was the special status given to the State within the Indian Union, providing greater autonomy and legalized through Article 370 of the constitution. However, from October 1949 when the Constituent Assembly of India inserted Article 306A, which from 17 November 1952 became operative as Article 370, J&K state was ensured autonomy within the Indian Constitution. Right away it became a bone of contention between two diametrically opposing groups, within the State and at the Centre. In opposition, there is a very strong demand, essentially voiced by the J&K National Conference but supported by many groups and scholars both within and outside the State, for maintaining the special status. This school favors the restoration of the autonomy that it maintains has been severely eroded since the Delhi Agreement of 1952. Its proponents strongly contest the argument of their opponents that autonomy was in any way responsible for the emergence of the secessionist movement in J&K.

On the contrary, they argue it was the breach of trust and the continuous erosion of autonomy on the part of India (done illegally and unconstitutionally) which resulted in creating that sense of alienation among the people of the State. This school strongly supports the restoration of autonomy as the only viable solution to the vexed Kashmir problem. Legal luminary, columnist and author A. G. Noorani essentially belongs to the latter school of thought. His book, Article 370: a constitutional history of Jammu and Kashmir covers a wide range of politico-constitutional developments in the J&K State from 1947 to 2010, tracing the checkered story of the relationship between the State and the Indian Union so as to give a comprehensive picture of how the history of broken promises unfolded and how, in the absence of a cohesive counter-fight, power won out. From J&K’s accession to India in 1947 to various negotiations thereafter – Sheikh Abdullah’s arrest to the framing of the State’s constitution, the granting special status down to its complete erosion and the replacement of Sadr-i-Riyasat and finally providing a draft proposal for the restoration of Article 370 – the twelve chapters cover every aspect of the constitutional history of the State. The author not only exposes many Central leaders but also puts Kashmiri leaders in the dock for not rising up against the ‘injustice’ meted out to their people. Noorani states that Sheikh Abdullah and Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel had serious disagreements over the original draft of Article 370, and it was unilaterally altered by N. Gopalaswamy Ayyangar without the consent of the Sheikh and his colleagues. Had the originally agreed draft been approved, the dismissal of Sheikh Abdullah later in 1953 would have been impossible. ‘It was an unfortunate breach that created distrust’, concludes Noorani.

The book reveals that Nehru ditched his friend Sheikh Abdullah, for even he was for abrogation of Article 370. Nehru told the Lok Sabha on 27 November 1963, that it has been eroded, if I may use the word, and many things have been done in the last few years which have made the relationship of Kashmir with the Union of India very close. There is no doubt that Kashmir is fully integrated … We feel this process of gradual erosion of Article 370 is going on. Some fresh steps are being taken and in the next month or two they will be completed. We should allow it to go on. Article 370 should come as a big jolt to the BJP and other anti-autonomy groups as it provides documentary evidence to show that Article 370 had the full approval of the late Shyama Prasad Mukerjee – whom the BJP invariably invoke while voicing opposition to Article 370. The book also states that this constitutional provision also had the complete approval of the then Home Minister Sardar Patel, whom again the BJP cite as a strong opponent of Nehru’s move to grant special status to J&K. Noorani states that Article 370 was a solemn compact, resulting from serious negotiations, with neither side mandated to amend or abrogate it unilaterally, except in accordance with the terms of that provision. However, the reality always remained somewhat different. He quotes the then-Home Minister Gulzari Lal Nanda in the Lok Sabha on 4 December 1964: ‘With regard to the rest of India, if by Jenny Bourne on November 13, 2014rac.sagepub.comDownloaded from a state’s powers are to be curbed, and correspondingly those of the Union enlarged, the elaborate procedure laid down in Article 368 will have to be fol- lowed. However, in the case of J&K, a mere executive order by the President under Article 370 would suffice.’ That is exactly what happened; at the end of the day, Article 370 became a fiasco. Here we have a strong case for restoring full autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir. Via ninety-two historical documents which are reproduced, the book suggests revisiting Article 370 with a draft proposal. Noorani believes that with political will, sincerity of purpose and a spirit of compromise, it would not be difficult to retrieve from the wreckage of Article 370 a constitutional settlement to satisfy the aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Though the arguments and facts documented in the book are not new, its uniqueness lies in the evidence it provides to support the arguments. The author has painstakingly collected together rare, often unseen and unnoticed, letters, memoranda, White Papers, proclamations and amendments that give this book authenticity and make it an indispensable source on Kashmir. One can hardly find any gaps and its only drawback is that its language may restrict its readership a bit. Since the book is mostly in the form of Resolutions, White Papers and proceedings, in the form of what one might call constitutional language, it may be difficult for everyone to understand. A bit of commentary on the part of the author on these documents would have been appreciated. Also, the price of the book is slightly on the high side. However, this in no way takes credit away from the author. It is a book that can be studied by all, irrespective of discipline – an essential read for all policymakers and students of Kashmiri history and politics.