ABROGATION OF ARTICLE 370 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION : A

POLITICO-LEGAL ANALYSIS

Submitted To:

Dr. Avinash Samal,

Faculty, Public Policy Process

Submitted by:

Taruna Shandilya

Roll No.-180

Section-B

Semester- VI. B.A.L.LB. (Hons.)

Hidayatullah National Law

University, Post Uparwara, Abhanpur, New Raipur – 493661
(Chattisgarh)
1
 DECLARATION

I, hereby declare that, the project work entitled, ‘Abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution
– A Politico-Legal Analysis’ submitted to H.N.L.U., Raipur is record of an original work done by me
under the able guidance of Dr. Avinash Samal , Faculty Member, H.N.L.U., Raipur.

Taruna Shandilya

Roll No.- 180

Section B

SEM VI

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to the Almighty who gave me the strength to accomplish the project with sheer hard work and
honesty. This research venture has been made possible due to the generous co-operation of various
persons. To list them all is not practicable, even to repay them with words is beyond the domain of my
lexicon.

This project wouldn’t have been possible without the help of my teacher Dr. Avinash Samal, Faculty,
Public Policy Process at HNLU, who had always been there at my side whenever I needed some help
regarding any information. He has been my mentor in the truest sense of the term. The administration
has also been kind enough to let me use their facilities for research work; I thank them for this.

3
 CONTENTS

Declaration.......................................................................................................................................2

Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................................3

Introduction...............................................................................................................................................5

Research and Objectives..................................................................................................................6

Chapter II...................................................................................................................................................7

Chapter III………..……………………………………………………..….………………………..…..10

Chapter IV………..…………………………………………………….…………………………..……13

Chapter V..................................................................................................................……….……17

Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................20

References......................................................................................................................................21

4
 CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION
On August 5 2019, the Centre's decision to abrogate provisions of Article 370 was "unconstitutional"
since people of Jammu and Kashmir were "bypassed", one of the petitioners told the Supreme Court,
which on Tuesday commenced hearing on a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of
the government.

A 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice N V Ramana was told by the petitioners that any
proposal for altering the constitutional status of the erstwhile state should emanate from citizens there
and the Centre's move was violative of Constitution as orders were passed in "disregard of consent" of
peopleofJ&K1.
Provisions of Article 370, which gave special status to the erstwhile state of J&K, was abrogated by
the Centre on August 5. Article 370 embodied six special provisions for Jammu and Kashmir:

1. It exempted the State from the complete applicability of the Constitution of India. The State
was conferred with the power to have its own Constitution.

2. Central legislative powers over the State were limited, at the time of framing, to the three
subjects of defence, foreign afairs and communications.

3. Other constitutional powers of the Central Government could be extended to the State only
with the concurrence of the State Government.

4. The 'concurrence' was only provisional. It had to be ratified by the State's Constituent
Assembly.

5. The State Government's authority to give 'concurrence' lasted only until the State Constituent
Assembly was convened. Once the State Constituent Assembly finalised the scheme of powers
and dispersed, no further extension of powers was possible.

6. Article 370 could be abrogated or amended only upon the recommendation of the State's
Constituent Assembly.

1
"Kashmir: five-judge Supreme Court Bench to hear pleas challenging abrogation of Article 370". The Hindu. Retrieved 31 August 2019.

5
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The method of research adopted for the project is the analytical and descriptive method. The texts that were
used for the project include articles, research papers and news given in various websites as well as online
journals.

OBJECTIVES

To discuss the nature of the Article 370 of the Indian Constitution
To explain the importance of Article 370 ,
 To discuss the impact of Article 370 on Jammu and Kashmir and its people; and

 To study the effects on rights of people of Kashmir.

6
 CHAPTER II- WHY IS KASHMIR
CONTROVERSIAL?

1. J&K’s accession to India in 1947 was hurried and controversial

Prior to the 1947 partition, which established India and Pakistan as separate nations, J&K was a
Muslim-majority princely state that was subject to indirect, rather than direct, rule under the
British.This status gave the region’s Hindu ruler, Maharajah Hari Singh, the power to decide whether
the state would accede to India or Pakistan in 1947 — or become independent. An incursion by
Pakistani raiders in October 1947 and a subsequent war between the two countries resulted in Hari
Singh hurriedly acceding to India. While Indian leaders welcomed his decision, Pakistan maintained
that Hari Singh was in no position to make this choice on behalf of his people.This troubled context
led the Constituent Assembly of India to enact Article 370 in 1949; when the Indian constitution
came into force in 1950, so did Article 370.India always intended this provision to be temporary —
and Hindu nationalist groups have pushed for its revocation since the 1950s. But for Kashmiris,
especially Kashmiri Muslims, Article 370 has long held symbolic value as a guardian of their unique
identity within India. It also has provided them with real benefits, including preference in securing
local jobs.

2. Insurgent violence in Kashmir did not arise overnight2

After the 1947-1948 Indo-Pakistani war, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 47 in
April 1948. This resolution held that Pakistan must withdraw its troops from the region, India
must reduce its military presence, and India must hold a referendum to allow the Kashmiri
people to determine their own fate.In elections held in Indian-administered Kashmir in 1951,
voters supported J&K’s union with India. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru of the Congress
Party used these results to argue that the will of the Kashmiri people had rendered the
referendum question irrelevant. India’s Congress government reiterated this position in 1954-
2
"How Modi govt cleverly used Art 370 to remove special status". Times News Network. 6 August 2019. Retrieved 21 August 2019 – via The Times of
India.
7
 1955 when it alleged that Pakistan had failed to withdraw its troops, which was a precondition
for the referendum.State-level elections in Kashmir in 1987 precipitated insurgent violence. The
J&K National Conference (JKNC) party, which supported the state’s integration with India, was
declared victorious. However, election observers suggested that the Muslim United Front (MUF)
coalition, which favored separatism, had won the contest. In the aftermath of the 1987 elections,
numerous young Kashmiri Muslim men began joining insurgent groups, and the government
instituted curfews, lockdowns and other forms of repression. In early 1990, Kashmir also
witnessed the mass exodus of the Hindu Pandit community, when Muslim militants targeted this
local minority.

3. The marginalization of Kashmiri Muslims could increase violence

Political science research suggests two pathways through which violence in Kashmir could escalate
following the revocation of Article 370. First, studies indicate that when a national minority in a
peripheral region is politically excluded from power, such exclusion can fuel insurgent violence. The
recent house arrests of prominent Kashmiri politicians could further increase Kashmiri Muslims’
sense of marginalization, and invigorate rebel groups. A second way that conflict might escalate is
through strengthening nativist sentiments. Scholars call these “sons of the soil” conflicts — when
incoming migrants clash with native populations. This type of violence in India has been tied to
ethnic riots and insurgencies3.

4. But job creation and political inclusion could help stabilize the area

In his Aug. 8 address, Modi promised peace and development for Kashmir and appealed to
citizens to invest in the region to boost job growth. Evidence from India’s other long-running
insurgency — the Maoist conflict, which has also afected states that were previously under
indirect rule — suggests that generating employment can stanch conflict. But whether India will
create enough jobs to stem the deep-seated grievances of Kashmiri Muslims remains to be seen.

3
Venkataramanan, K. (5 August 2019). "Explained | How the status of Jammu and Kashmir is being changed". The Hindu. Archived from the original on
6 August 2019.
8
There’s another potential pathway to mitigate violence — if younger local leaders can come to
replace dynastic politics, which is commonplace in J&K. The two main parties in the region —
the JKNC and the J&K People’s Democratic Party (JKPDP) — are headed by well-to-do
Muslim families who have dominated Kashmiri politics for generations. Modi has implied that
repealing Articles 370 and 35A would allow fresh faces to enter the electoral arena. Changes in
local leadership could dampen the sense of exclusion among Kashmiri Muslims and help to
restore their faith in Indian democracy. This would entail genuine political representation and
transparent and fair elections. However, if the BJP’s revocation of Article 370 — which required
approval from J&K’s government — is anything to go by, then such political liberalization does
not appear to be part of the ruling party’s modus operandi.

CHAPTER III- SIGNIFICANCE OF ARTICLE 370

9
 The state of Jammu and Kashmir original accession, like all other princely states, was on three
matters, defence, foreign affairs and communications. A the princely states were invited to send
representatives to India’s Constituent Assembly, which was formulating a constitution for the
whole of India. They were also encouraged to set up constituent assemblies for their own states.
Most states were unable to set up assemblies in time, but a few states did, in particular Saurashtra
Union, Travancore-Cochin and Mysore. Even though the States Department developed a model
constitution for the states, on 19 May 1949, the rulers and chief ministers of all the states met in
the presence of States Department and agreed that separate constitutions for the states were not
necessary. They accepted the Constitution of India as their own constitution. The states that did
elect constituent assemblies suggested a few amendments which were accepted. The position of
all the states (or unions of states) thus became equivalent to that of regular Indian provinces. In
particular, this meant that the subjects available for legislation by the central and state
governments was uniform across India4.

In the case of Jammu and Kashmir, the representatives to the Constituent Assembly requested
that only those provisions of the Indian Constitution that corresponded to the original Instrument
of Accession should be applied to the State and that the state's constituent assembly, when
formed, would decide on the other matters. Government of India agreed to the demands shortly
before the above meeting with the other states. Accordingly, the Article 370 was incorporated
into the Indian Constitution, which stipulated that the other articles of the Constitution that gave
powers to the Central Government would be applied to Jammu and Kashmir only with the
concurrence of the State's constituent assembly. This was a "temporary provision" in that its
applicability was intended to last till the formulation and adoption of the State's constitution.
However, the State's constituent assembly dissolved itself on 25 January 1957 without
recommending either abrogation or amendment of the Article 370. Thus, the Article was
considered to have become a permanent feature of the Indian constitution, as confirmed by
various rulings of the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, the
latest of which was in April 2018

Article 370 of the Constitution is a ‘temporary provision’ which promises to grant autonomous
status to Jammu and Kashmir and limits Parliament’s powers to make laws for the state. Under

4
"The importance of Article 370". The Hindu. 15 October 2015. Retrieved 19 September2019.
10
 Part XXI of the Constitution titled “Temporary, transitional and special provisions", Article 370
is categorised as a “temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir"5.

Notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, the Article limits Parliament’s powers to make
laws to those matters in the Union and Concurrent Lists, in consultation with the state
government, as declared by the President, which should correspond with matters specified under
of Instrument of Accession, the statute says. The Jammu and Kashmir Assembly currently stands
dissolved.In effect, Article 370 says that Parliament will need the state government’s
concurrence for applying any law, except those that fall in the domains of defence, foreign
affairs, finance and communications. Issues like ownership of property, fundamental rights and
citizenship are covered under a separate law for Jammu and Kashmir. It also lays down that only
two Articles of the Constitution will apply to Jammu and Kashmir – Article 1 which defines
India and Article 370 itself. The provision was included in the Constitution on 17 October, 1949.

Article 370 itself mentions Article 1, which includes J&K in the list of states. Article 370 has
been described as a tunnel through which the Constitution is applied to J&K. India has used
Article 370 at least 45 times to extend provisions of the Indian Constitution to J&K. This is the
only way through which, by mere Presidential Orders, India has almost nullified the effect of
J&K’s special status. By the 1954 order, almost the entire Constitution was extended to J&K
including most Constitutional amendments. Ninety- four of 97 entries in the Union List are
applicable to J&K; 26 out of 47 items of the Concurrent List have been extended.; 260 of 395
Articles have been extended to the state.

The Centre has used Article 370 even to amend a number of provisions of J&K’s Constitution,
though that power was not given to the President under Article 370. Article 356 was extended
though a similar provision that was already in Article 92 of the J&K Constitution, which
required that President’s Rule could be ordered only with the concurrence of the President. To
change provisions for the Governor being elected by the Assembly, Article 370 was used to
convert it into a nominee of the President. To extend President’s rule beyond one year in Punjab,
the government needed the 59th, 64th, 67th and 68th Constitutional Amendments, but achieved
the same result in J&K just by invoking Article 370. In certain ways, Article 370 reduces J&K’s
powers in comparison to other states. It is more useful for India today than J&K.
5
"Parliament unanimously passes resolution condemning India's 'unilateral move' on Kashmir". Dawn. 7 August 2019. Retrieved 7 August 2019.
11
 Article 3 of the J&K Constitution declares J&K to be an integral part of India. In the Preamble to
the Constitution, not only is there no claim to sovereignty, but to further define the existing
relationship of the state with the Union of India as its integral part thereof. Moreover people of
state are referred as ‘permanent residents’ not ‘citizens’.” Article 370 is not an issue of integration
but of autonomy. Those who advocate its deletion are more concerned with uniformity rather than
integration6.

6
"Article 370: SC fixes Nov 14 for hearing on constitutional validity of Centre's decision" . Press Trust of India. 1 October 2019. Retrieved 18
October 2019 – via The Times of India.
12
 CHAPTER IV- CALLS FOR THE ABROGATION OF
ARTICLE 370

The state of Jammu and Kashmir includes three distinct regions: Buddhist Ladakh, Hindu
Jammu and Muslim Kashmir. These comprise 62.3%, 22.7% and 15% of the area of the state.
This means that Kashmir is merely 15% of the total area of the state. The tables are turned
when it comes to demographics. Kashmir is most populous, comprising 53.9% of the state
population with Jammu forming 43.7% and Ladakh a mere 2.3% share7.

Like many a political entity, the modern state of Jammu and Kashmir is a historical accident.
During the dying days of the Mughal Empire, the revolting Sikhs established their own short-
lived empire. They first conquered Jammu and then expanded to Kashmir. Starting in 1834,
Zorawar Singh Kahluria, the Dogra general of the Sikhs, led audacious campaigns in high
altitude to conquer Buddhist Ladakh and Shia Baltistan. In 1841, Kahluria ended up with a lance
in his chest when he attempted to conquer western Tibet, but the Dogras now controlled a
swathe of territory, which is currently shared between India, Pakistan and China.

While most royal families joined newly independent India or Pakistan, Hari Singh had illusions
and delusions of grandeur. He wanted to rule a Himalayan Switzerland. Pakistan saw Muslim-
majority Kashmir as a natural part of its nation-building project and dispatched Pashtun
tribesmen to wrest it. In a panic, the Dogra ruler signed the Instrument of Accession on October
26, 1947, and Indian troops landed in Srinagar. Even as Indian troops were pushing back Pashtun
tribesmen, Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister, took the matter to the United Nations
on January 1, 1948.

Nearly four months later, the UN Security Council called for a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir.
First, Pakistan was supposed to withdraw Pashtun tribesmen and its nationals. Second, India
would then reduce its forces “progressively to the minimum strength required for the support of
the civil power in the maintenance of law and order.” Then, there would be a plebiscite that
7
Mahapatra, Dhananjay (4 April 2018). "Article 370 has acquired permanent status: Supreme Court". Times News Network. Retrieved 21 August 2019 –
via The Times of India
13
 would decide where the state would go. The resolution remains stillborn till this date because
neither party has followed it.

Instead of troops decreasing in Kashmir as per the resolution, they have only increased over the
years. The reason is simple: Neither Pakistan nor India trust each other. Besides, for each of
them, the Kashmir Valley is an essential part of its nation-building project. For Pakistan,
Muslim-majority Kashmir must be a part of its territory. For multicultural India, Kashmir as a
part of its nation proves this is home to diverse communities who are all part of an exquisite
mosaic. Kashmir is an existential issue that is tied to the very identity of both nations8.

Since independence, India and Pakistan have clashed repeatedly over Kashmir. The first war
began in October 1947 and ended in January 1949. It led to the de facto division of the region
along the so-called Line of Control (LoC), the unofficial borderline that has lasted until today.
The two countries fought two full-scale wars in 1965 and 1971. The second of the wars led to
the creation of Bangladesh. They also clashed over Siachen and Kargil in 1985 and 1999
respectively. There have been numerous other occasions when tensions have run high.

After its resounding victory in 1962, China took control of Aksai Chin from India. Until then, this
had been a part of Ladakh. Culturally, this part of India had deep relations with Tibet for
centuries. China first invaded Tibet in 1950 and the Dalai Lama fled to India in 1959.

India’s policy on the state of Jammu and Kashmir is a lot more complex than the Indian,
Pakistani or foreign press make it out to be. In the early days, there were close relations
between Sheikh Abdullah, the Kashmiri leader campaigning against Dogra autocratic rule, and
Nehru. Once the last Dogra ruler acceded to India, Abdullah took over as the elected leader of
the state. His relations with Nehru soured soon. Like Hari Singh before him, Abdullah was
supposedly swayed by visions of being the big boss of the Switzerland of the Himalayas. As per
rumors, he was planning to declare independence on August 21, 1953, the auspicious day of

8
Jaleel, Muzamil; Masood, Bashaarat; Akhzer, Adil (7 August 2019). "Kashmir Valley has seen many a lockdown but why this time it is so
different". The Indian Express. Retrieved 10 August 2019.
14
 Eid. Instead, Abdullah was arrested on August 8 and Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed took charge9.

In 1949, Nehru directed the drafters of the Constitution of India to give the state of Jammu and
Kashmir special autonomy. They drafted Article 370 to govern India’s relations with the state.
Many declare that this provision is the basis of the state’s entry into India. In fact, this article was
in Part XXI titled, “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions.” Louise Tillin maintains that
“Article 370 was a temporary expediency designed to govern the state’s relations with India
before the military conflict over its status could be resolved.”

Right from the outset, this article proved controversial. People in Jammu, Ladakh and the rest of
the country bitterly opposed Article 370 while Kashmiris passionately supported it. The article
allowed the state to have a separate constitution, a state flag and administrative autonomy. Only
defense, foreign afairs and communications were to remain in New Delhi’s hands. A constituent
assembly was elected in 1951 and dissolved in 1956 that drafted a separate constitution for Jammu
and Kashmir, a privilege not allowed to any other Indian state.

Even as Nehru threw Abdullah into jail, his government imposed only part of the constitution in
Jammu and Kashmir. In particular, Nehru’s government issued Article 35A into the constitution
under a presidential order under Article 370. Article 35A gave the state government of Jammu
and Kashmir the power to decide who can purchase land, vote, contest elections, get government
employment, and avail educational or health care benefits. They decided to give these rights only
to permanent residents of the state.

Kashmiris have feared that India would emulate Pakistan and change its demography. They were
terrified of losing the demographic advantage in the state. So, they defined permanent residency
very restrictively. Hindus and Sikhs who immigrated from modern-day Pakistan during or after
the partition of 1947 were denied permanent residency and still do not have the right to vote in
state elections. Women who married men from another state no longer qualified as permanent
residents. Nor do their children.

9
"About 4,000 people arrested in Kashmir since August 5: govt sources to AFP". Agence France-Presse. 18 August 2019. Retrieved 20 August 2019 –
via The Hindu.
15
 Over the years, India whittled down provisions of Article 370, but Jammu and Kashmir’s
politicians retained more power than their counterparts in other states, The decades, many
hoist the Pakistani flag, sing its anthem and wear its cricket jersey. In 2007, a poll found that
87% Kashmiris wanted independence while 90% Jammuites wanted to stay in India.
There is an argument to be made that New Delhi has erred egregiously in dealing with
Kashmiris. The losers of that election formed the All Party Hurriyat Conference, which has been
campaigning for self-determination since. More importantly, most analysts blame Rajiv
Gandhi’s decision for the insurgency that broke out in 1989 and has lasted ever since10.

For the last 30 years, India has thrown money and men to solve the problem. New Delhi gives
Jammu and Kashmir 14,225 rupees ($200) per capita as a central grant.

CHAPTER V - EFFECTS ON RIGHTS OF PEOPLE OF KASHMIR

10
"Hundreds rally in Delhi to protest against India's Kashmir move". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 8 August 2019.
16
Children as young as 9-years-old had been picked up under preventive detention in the immediate
aftermath of the August 5 lockdown in Jammu and Kashmir, a report filed before the Supreme
court on Tuesday said11.

The report filed by the four-judge Juvenile Justice Committee (JC) of the J&K High court, however,
maintains that the detainee' children were released from custody on the same day as their detention'
and no child was kept or taken into illegal detention by the Police authorities as strict adherence is
placed on the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act.

The four-member JJC, which includes justices AM Magrey, DS Thakur, Sanjeev Kumar and
Rashid Ali Dar of the J&K High court, has not made any comments on the inquiry conducted, but
has reproduced the report filed by the DGP Srinagar, who has "categorically refuted the assertions
and allegations made in the media reports" and the PIL.

According to the data attached to the report, 144 children under 18 years of age had been
picked up by police between August 5 and September 23 this year. Eighty six of these
children were picked-up under Preventive Detention provisions of the Criminal procedure
Code in areas said to be afected by stone-pelting and other disturbance. The remaining
children were arrested under allegations of rioting, stone-pelting, causing damage to public
property, wrongfully restraining movement of persons and attacking police personnel. An
11-year-old was picked-up under section 107 under CrPC provisions from Batamaloo on
August 5, while a 9-year-old and an 11-year-old from Batamaloo were picked up on
August 7. All these children were released the same day they were detained, according to
the chart filed by police.

Civil rights activists urged the government on Saturday to restore Articles 370 and 35A of the
Constitution and take steps to bring back normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir. Social activist
Shabnam Hashmi said the abrogation of Article 370, which gave a special status to Jammu and
Kashmir, was a mindless exercise carried out by the BJP-led government. "The government first
did demonetisation and said this will end terrorism. Then they did surgical strikes and said terror

11
"The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019, C.O. 272" (PDF). The Gazette of India (444). 5 August 2019. Retrieved 19
September 2019.
17
had ended. On February 26, after the Balakot airstrike, they claimed that we had killed around
600 militants.

Several check post were set up by the administration to prevent activities that could break
harmony. Delhi-based journalist and writer Revati Laul said removing Article 370 was the
main cause of trauma for the people of Jammu and Kashmir. "People in Jammu have lost
business because it was being force-fed this narrative that you have to say you like it. In
Jammu, more people refused to talk to us as compared to Kashmir," she said The activists
urged the government to restore Articles 370 and 35A, mobile and internet services and
remove the restrictions on the movement of people in the valley12.

The situation in Jammu and Kashmir is "normal" and the people there are "happy" over the
abrogation of Article as 370 provisions they will now get benefits and entitlements on par with
citizens of rest of the country, information and broadcasting minister Prakash Javadekar has
said He also asserted that there have been no restrictions on media and that all newspapers are
being published in the Valley without any difficulty.The minister also rejected the
opposition's charge that the BJP was using withdrawal of Jammu and Kashmir's special status
as poll plank in the run-up to assembly elections in Haryana and Maharashtra, saying it was
the people who were talking about the historic move as it caught their imagination.

"Article 370 has caught the imagination of people.They are welcoming the move because it will
benefit people in Jammu and Kashmir will now get benefits of all the government schemes which
were not available them prior to abrogation of the Article 370.

Under Jammu and Kashmir's special status, the state had the right to its own decision making
process for several key subjects except very few including defence, communications and foreign
afairs. Various central laws were not applicable to the state."Under Right to Education, 25 per
cent students from economically weaker sections get admission. It was not applicable to J and K,
but now it will be applicable," he said People of Jammu and Kashmir did not get benefits under
various schemes for OBCS but they will get it now. Similarly, people from Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes had no political reservation but they will get it now, Javadekar said. "The
home minister gave a list of 126 laws that did not apply in Kashmir but are now all applicable
12
"India arrests over 500 in Kashmir as Pakistan cuts railway". Associated Press. Retrieved 8 August 2019 – via The Washington Times.
18
 there. People are getting benefit out of it and therefore they are happy. All the central schemes
are now operational in the Kashmir Valley, Jammu and Ladakh," he said. Pakistan was able to
fuel separatism in the last 50-60 years in Jammu and Kashmir because of the Article 37013.

13
"Article 370 is permanent, rules J&K High Court". Press Trust of India. 11 October 2015. Retrieved 25 March 2017 – via The Hindu.
19
 CONCLUSION

The United Nations has concluded that both Indian and Pakistani forces have committed
human rights violations on both sides of the border. Violations on the Indian side have
been covered widely in The New York Times, Al Jazeera and other news organizations.
What has not been covered is how the oppressed have turned oppressors. Furious at the
loyalty of Jammuites and Ladakhis to India, Kashmiris have systematically denied them
money, marginalized them politically and neglected their infrastructure. They have also
engaged in the ethnic cleansing of the minority Kashmiri Pandits. In 2016, the BBC
reported that between 3,000 to 5,000 Pandits were left in Kashmir Valley, “a far cry from
the 300,000 who used to live there.”

The sufering of Buddhist Ladakhis has practically gone unchronicled. These simple
mountain folk are kindred spirits to Tibetans. They have similar language, customs, cuisine,
culture and way of life to the people of the Dalai Lama. Along with Sikkim, Ladakh is one of
the two Buddhist enclaves left in the land of the Buddha. Terrified of what China has done to
their brethren and what the Taliban did to Bamiyan, Ladakhis have yearned for protection from
New Delhi.

20
Page

20
 REFERENCES

1.  "Article 370 revoked: Which political parties supported the bill, which opposed it". India
Today. 5 August 2019. Retrieved 20 August 2019.
2.  "Ladakh's UT status triggers jubilation in Leh, resentment in Kargil". The Times of
India. 5 August 2019. Retrieved 19 November 2019.
3.  "Why are Kargil people against Art 370 abrogation?". Deccan Herald. 9 August 2019.
Retrieved 19 November 2019.
4.  Prabhu, Sunil (5 August 2019). Sanyal, Anindita (ed.). "Already, Rajya Sabha Clears
J&K As Union Territory Instead Of State". NDTV. Retrieved 22 August 2019.
5. "Article 370: India strips disputed Kashmir of special status". BBC News. 5 August 2019.
Retrieved 19 September 2019.

21
Page

21