New Delhi: Amidst the parliamentary storm over Manipur, the central government introduced the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2023 in the Lok Sabha Wednesday, paving the way for reserving three seats in the J&K assembly for nominated members from displaced communities.
Two of these seats are reserved for the “Kashmiri migrant community”, with at least one nominee required to be a woman. Additionally, one seat will be allocated to a member from the “displaced persons from Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir” category. These members, the bill says, will be nominated by the Lieutenant Governor of J&K.
The bill, in line with the report of the J&K Delimitation Commission, further seeks to increase the number of seats in the Jammu & Kashmir assembly from 107 to 114.
Of these 114 seats, 24 are reserved for Pakistan-occupied J&K (PoJK). Of the remaining 90 seats, nine have been reserved for Scheduled Tribes (STs)— for the first time— and seven others have been reserved for the Scheduled Castes (SCs).
The bill was introduced by Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai on behalf of Union Home Minister Amit Shah. It proposes several amendments to the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, which bifurcated the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union territories, namely J&K and Ladakh. The Act has been challenged in the Supreme Court, which is still reviewing the case.
Citing this fact, Jammu & Kashmir National Conference Lok Sabha MP Hasnain Masoodi voiced his objection to the bill on the floor of Parliament Wednesday on the grounds that it was “constitutionally suspect”.
“You cannot amend an Act which is under judicial scrutiny. The J&K Reorganisation Act is being examined by the Supreme Court,” Masoodi said.
Here’s a look at some of the proposed changes in the bill and the reasons given for reserving seats for nominated members of certain communities.
Also Read: More than G20 Kashmir event, the real normalcy in J&K lies in a free and fair election
What are the amendments to J&K Reorganisation Act?
The bill proposes amending Section 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 to increase the total number of seats to 114.
It states that “on and from the date of commencement of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Act, 2023, the provisions of this sub-section (3) shall have effect as if for the figures “107”, the figures “114” had been substituted.”
It further inserts Section 15A and 15B in the legislation, providing for the nomination of the two MLAs from the Kashmiri migrant community and one from “displaced persons” from PoJK.
In keeping with the provisions of the existing Reorganisation Act, the three nominated members will have voting rights in the assembly, similar to the legislative model in the Union territory of Puducherry.
Section 13 of the Reorganisation Act 2019 states: “On and from the appointment day, the provisions contained in article 239A, which are applicable to ‘Union territory of Puducherry’, shall also apply to the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir'”.
Last year, notably, the J&K Delimitation Commission, led by retired Supreme Court Judge Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, submitted a report making recommendations to provide reservations in the assembly for the “Kashmiri migrant” and “displaced persons from PoJK” communities.
In a press release in May 2022, the commission said that two Kashmiri migrant members, including at least one woman, should be given powers “at par” with those held by the nominated members in the Puducherry legislative assembly.
In the case of displaced persons from PoJK, the recommendations of the commission had been less specific.
“The central government may consider giving the displaced persons from Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir some representation in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly, by way of nomination of representatives,” the release said.
The 2023 bill now specifies that the three MLAs will be nominated by the Lieutenant Governor of J&K.
Reasons for quota
Section 15B of the proposed amendment clarifies that displaced members from Pakistan-occupied J&K encompass those who were uprooted during Partition and during the disturbances in the region due to conflicts between India and Pakistan in 1947-48, 1965, and 1971.
The bill explains that the government’s rationale for allocating a seat to refugees from PoKJ stems from the suffering of the community during various conflicts.
It says that “in the wake of the 1947 Pakistani aggression” in the region, a total of 31,779 families migrated from the occupied areas to the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir.
Among these, 26,319 families settled within the region, while 5,460 moved to other parts of the country, it adds.
It further says that during the Indo-Pak wars of 1965 and 1971, another 10,065 families from the Chhamb Niabat area were displaced. Of these, 3,500 families were displaced during the 1965 war, and 6,565 during the 1971 war.
It concludes that a total of 41,844 families “were displaced during the 1947-48, 1965, and 1971 Indo-Pak wars”.
In the case of Kashmiri migrants, the bill justifies the proposed amendment by referring to the time of militancy in J&K, “particularly in Kashmir (Division) in 1989-90”.
During this period, it notes, a significant number of people migrated from their ancestral homes in the Kashmir province, “particularly the Kashmiri Hindus and Pandits along with a few families belonging to Sikh and Muslim communities”.
The bill says that 46,517 families, comprising 158,976 individuals, have registered over the last three decades with “the relief organisation of the government of Jammu and Kashmir”.
‘Not enough’
Reactions to the proposed quotas have been mixed. Sunil Pandita, a prominent Kasmhmiri Pandit activist, told ThePrint that the reservation could be counterproductive for the community.
“The bill is fine, but the way it has been brought is not suitable. We wanted people of our community to be elected, not selected. The nominated person will be loyal to the political party that nominated them. However, we wanted our people to be elected so they work for the people,” Pandita said.
Similar sentiments were echoed by Rajiv Chuni, chairman of SOS International, an organisation that works for PoJK displaced persons.
Chuni labelled it a “betrayal” that their seats remained stagnant even as the number of constituencies in other parts of Jammu & Kashmir increased after delimitation.
“We wanted eight seats and they gave us only one,” he said.
Chuni also referred to the 183rd report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, which highlighted the challenges faced by refugees and displaced persons in J&K.
“The Parliamentary Standing Committee in 2014 recommended eight seats. The BJP leadership had also promised us eight seats,” he said.
The aforementioned report was tabled on the floor of the House on 22 December, 2014. It had recommended defreezing eight seats out of the 24 reserved for PoJK.
Meanwhile, Raman Bhalla, Congress working president in J&K, also expressed his dissatisfaction about the number of seats given to the PoJK refugees.
Speaking to ThePrint, he said: “We welcome the seats for Kashmiri Pandits but for PoJK refugees at least eight seats were demanded. It’s like unth ke moon mein zeera (a cumin in the mouth of a camel).”
Calling the move a “political stunt”, he added that the Sikh community had also demanded seats, but had been overlooked.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)
Also Read: Kashmir sees ‘drastic fall’ in terror recruitment after Army & police launch de-radicalisation drive