Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
The Omar Abdullah government is at a critical juncture. The growing frustration among the public, coupled with internal party rumbling, threatens to derail the NC’s ability to govern effectively. However, the situation is not beyond redemption. By demonstrating decisive leadership, engaging with the people, and delivering visible results, the government can begin to reverse the tide.
Failure to act decisively now could result in political irrelevance for the National Conference and further alienation of the people of Jammu & Kashmir. Leadership requires not just holding power but also exercising it effectively for the betterment of those who placed their trust in it. Omar Abdullah must rise to the occasion—time is running out.
The Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) and Delhi offer two contrasting narratives of governance and leadership in India. Both regions are unique in having elected governments coexisting with the significant administrative authority of a Lieutenant Governor (LG), appointed by the Central Government. However, the divergent leadership styles of Omar Abdullah in Kashmir and Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi illustrate how elected governments can either falter or thrive under similar constitutional challenges.
The powers of the Lieutenant Governors of J&K and Delhi are rooted in different legal frameworks, which shape their interactions with the elected governments.
The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) Act, 1991, and subsequent amendments define the distribution of powers between the Delhi government and the LG. While the LG has significant control over police, public order, and land, the elected government holds authority over other matters, including education, health, and electricity. However, the LG can override the Delhi government in certain cases by referring matters to the President.
The reorganization of J&K into a Union Territory (UT) under the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019, significantly diluted the powers of the elected government. The LG wields expansive powers, including control over most administrative functions, making the role of the Chief Minister more ceremonial than executive. Unlike Delhi, where the Supreme Court has occasionally sided with the elected government, the J&K setup offers fewer legal safeguards to assert local governance.
Omar Abdullah, Chief Minister of J&K and leader of the National Conference (NC), finds himself constrained within this legal framework. Many factors have contributed to his apparent abdication of authority.
The abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 stripped J&K of its special constitutional status and statehood, reducing the powers of the legislative assembly. This legal transformation left the Chief Minister and cabinet with limited authority, especially over critical areas like law and order, which are controlled by the LG.
The bureaucratic apparatus in J&K operates under the direct control of the LG, bypassing the Chief Minister’s directives. This lack of cooperation weakens the elected government’s ability to implement its policies effectively.
While structural constraints are significant, Omar Abdullah’s government has not shown the urgency or resolve required to challenge this dynamic. There has been little visible effort to mobilize public opinion, seek judicial remedies, or assert the constitutional role of the elected government.
The political landscape in J&K is fraught with risks, including potential arrests or other forms of suppression by the Central Government. This has likely discouraged the NC from taking a confrontational stance, prioritizing survival over governance.
In stark contrast, Delhi’s Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has turned similar challenges into opportunities to assert the authority of his government. Despite constitutional limitations, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has focused on public engagement, judicial interventions, defiance and persistence.
Kejriwal’s government has consistently communicated with the people, showcasing achievements in education, healthcare, and public services. This has built a strong base of public support, making it difficult for the LG or Central Government to sideline the Delhi government without backlash.
The Delhi government has repeatedly approached the judiciary to clarify the distribution of powers between the LG and the elected government. The Supreme Court’s rulings in cases like Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) have affirmed the primacy of the elected government in areas other than those explicitly reserved for the LG.
Despite arrests, raids, and other forms of political harassment, Kejriwal and his ministers have continued to deliver on their promises, proving that effective governance can coexist with political resistance.
To restore its credibility and fulfill its mandate, the National Conference in Kashmir must adopt a more proactive and strategic approach. While the J&K government operates under a limited framework, it must still assert its authority within the areas where it has jurisdiction.
Publicly challenging bureaucratic overreach and demanding accountability from the LG can create political and public pressure. Seeking judicial intervention to clarify the constitutional relationship between the LG and the elected government, as Delhi has done, could help reclaim some degree of administrative control. The government must engage directly with the people to highlight the constraints it faces and the efforts it is making to overcome them. Transparency and communication can rebuild public trust. While structural challenges exist, focusing on areas where the elected government retains power—such as local development, education, and welfare—can demonstrate commitment and competence. The NC must adopt a more assertive stance against Central Government overreach. Mobilizing support from other regional parties and forming alliances could provide the political backing needed to challenge the status quo.
In a region as politically sensitive as Jammu & Kashmir, optics and perceptions matter as much as governance. Omar Abdullah’s perceived subservience to BJP leaders has created a damaging narrative of weak leadership and diminished autonomy. To overcome this, he must project strength, decisiveness, and unwavering commitment to the people of J&K.
By reasserting his authority, delivering tangible results, and recalibrating his relationship with Delhi, Omar Abdullah can rebuild public trust and reposition the National Conference as a credible force in J&K’s political landscape. Failure to address these perceptions risks long-term political irrelevance for both the leader and his party.
The contrasting approaches of Omar Abdullah in Kashmir and Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi highlight how leadership and strategy can shape governance outcomes under similar challenges. While the legal constraints in J&K are more severe, they do not absolve the National Conference of its responsibility to fight for the rights and welfare of the people.
By learning from Delhi’s example of resilience and adopting a more assertive, people-centric approach, the Kashmir government can begin to reclaim its authority and fulfill the promises it made to its citizens. The road ahead is fraught with challenges, but decisive action now could pave the way for a more empowered and effective governance model in J&K.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint