Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley while courting a fresh controversy over article 35 A without offering any legal explanations has said that Article 35-A is “constitutionally vulnerable” and an impediment to economic development in Jammu & Kashmir state and interestingly the timing choosen by him to make the remark over article 35-A in mid election season shows his political compulsion. Since Arun Jaitley is not only a power wielding politician presently holding the portfolio of finance ministry in the incumbent Narendra Modi led BJP government at the centre but also a jurist who knows both the constitutional history of Jammu & Kashmir and as well as the circumstances that led to state’s accession with the Union of India more than any other minister of the Modi government, so he owes explanations over the controversial remark he has made over article 35-A. People of Jammu & Kashmir would reserve the right to seek legal explanations from Arun Jaitely on the constitutional vulnerability of the Article 35-A and they reserve the right to ask Arun Jaitley that had article 35 A been constitutionally vulnerable and impeded the economic development of the state then the then President of India won’t have issued a constitutional order on article 35 A to make it part of the constitution of Jammu & Kashmir. Above all Jaitley might be knowing it himself that article 35-A is basically hereditary state subject law enforced in the state way back in the year 1927 almost 20 years before the state acceded with the Union Of India. When Jaitley says “does our policy today have to be guided by that erroneous vision or an out of box thinking which is in consonance with ground reality?”, even naives in Jammu & Kashmir would tell him that even an out of box thinking in consonance with the ground reality in the state would go against the abrogation of article-35 A and seek its preservation and protection in entirety.
Even naives won’t believe that Pt Nehru had an “erroneous” vision and even naives won’t accept that article 35 A is constitutionally vulnerable and above all the majority of the populations in all the three regions of the state—-Jammu, Kashmir and Ladhak are against abrogation of article 35 A. The remark of Arun Jaitley against article 35-A in election is just his political compulsion as he never and never made such an imaginary statement over article 35-A any time since in recent years.
Jaitley’s remark that first Prime Minister of the country Pt Jawaharlal Nehru had an “erroneous vision” speaks volumes about the political wisdom of Jaitley and his judgment about the post partition history of Jammu & Kashmir. Even naives won’t believe that Pt Nehru had an “erroneous” vision and even naives won’t accept that article 35 A is constitutionally vulnerable and above all the majority of the populations in all the three regions of the state—-Jammu, Kashmir and Ladhak are against abrogation of article 35 A. The remark of Arun Jaitley against article 35-A in election is just his political compulsion as he never and never made such an imaginary statement over article 35-A any time since in recent years.
