Introduction: In the complex political landscape of Jammu and Kashmir, the demand for the restoration of statehood has become a recurring theme—particularly championed by the Jammu & Kashmir National Conference (JKNC). While the demand is rooted in legitimate political and emotional grounds, a deeper concern arises: Has this demand become a shield for non-performance? Since the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the erstwhile state into two Union Territories in August 2019, parties like the JKNC have consistently called for the return of statehood. However, after choosing to contest elections under the current constitutional setup, continued failure in governance and public service delivery increasingly appears to be an evasion of responsibility. This raises a fundamental question: If Delhi—a Union Territory with similar constraints—can provide efficient governance, why can’t J&K?
I. Political Backdrop: Statehood V/S Governance: The abrogation of J&K’s special status in 2019 marked a watershed moment. The region’s downgrading to a Union Territory sparked political resistance, especially from JKNC, which adopted a hardline stance demanding immediate restoration of statehood and constitutional guarantees. But for ordinary citizens, ideological battles have long been overshadowed by practical concerns: power outages, crumbling infrastructure, rising unemployment, and poor service delivery. JKNC’s relentless focus on statehood, without matching efforts to address everyday issues, has begun to wear thin. Those who voted for them expecting improved governance and strong regional representation now demand results—not rhetoric.
Ii. What Being A Union Territory Actually Means: Understanding the Union Territory structure is critical. While UTs are administered by the Centre, those with legislative assemblies—like Delhi and J&K—retain significant control over vital sectors such as health, education, urban development, agriculture, and public welfare. In J&K, while law and order remain under the Centre, the local government still has substantial power to plan and implement policies affecting daily life. Blaming UT status for non-performance is misleading. It diverts attention from poor planning and weak execution—core governance issues unrelated to constitutional labels.
III. The Delhi Example; Governance Despite Constraints: Delhi offers a powerful counterexample. Despite similar structural limitations, successive governments in Delhi—particularly in recent years—have shown how UTs can function effectively and innovatively. Key achievements include:
Free electricity up to a certain usage threshold, Dramatic improvements in government schools, Mohalla clinics and access to free healthcare, Clean and piped drinking water, and Expansion and efficiency of public transport. Even with frequent clashes with the Centre, the Delhi government has found ways to serve its people. If Delhi can deliver despite constraints, why should J&K be any different?
IV. The Goverance Deficit In J&K: While there have been some infrastructure developments—like road projects and police modernization—the broader governance landscape remains disappointing.
Power Supply: Frequent outages, even during severe winters, despite smart meters and hiked tariffs
Water Crisis: Persistent shortages in both rural and urban areas
Healthcare: Inaccessible and under-resourced public hospitals
Connectivity: The Jammu-Srinagar highway remains vulnerable to frequent closures
“Leaders elected to solve, not to postpone issues. Dignity and autonomy restored via credible governance. Parties must prioritize effective governance over statehood demands. People elect leaders to solve issues promptly. The key to regaining dignity and autonomy lies in effective governance now. Focus on efficient governance over demanding statehood passionately.”
Smart City Execution: Srinagar and Jammu still struggle with drainage issues, traffic chaos, and unauthorized constructions. Meanwhile, youth unemployment remains high, and skill development schemes are sporadic and uncoordinated. These failings lie within the domain of local governance. Blaming the absence of statehood for them is not only disingenuous—it’s a disservice to the people.
V. Hiding Behind Statehood A Convenient Excuse: There’s a clear difference between demanding political rights and using that demand as a blanket excuse to escape accountability. By contesting elections, regional parties accept the current constitutional framework—at least in practice. Their responsibility, therefore, is to function effectively within it until changes are achieved. If statehood were restored tomorrow, would that fix power cuts, unemployment, or inadequate healthcare? Of course not. These are issues of governance, not constitutional status. They require thoughtful planning, effective management, and accountable leadership—qualities that have been in short supply.
VI. The Role Of Elected Leaders; Duty Over Drama: Governance begins after elections, not during rallies. Every elected MLA in J&K holds constitutional authority. Whether the region is a UT or a full-fledged state, the responsibilities of public representatives remain the same:
Deliver transparent and accountable governance
Ensure implementation of development and welfare schemes
Strengthen institutions and improve public service delivery
Represent their constituencies proactively
So what prevents MLAs from performing these basic duties? Certainly not the Constitution—but perhaps a lack of political will and administrative commitment. Instead of symbolic grandstanding, they should focus on: Monitoring central schemes like PMAY, Jal Jeevan Mission, and Ayushman Bharat, Auditing local administration and Holding public grievance meetings and outreach drives. True leaders serve their people regardless of the constitutional framework—they adapt, respond, and deliver.
VII. The People Deserve Better: Ultimately, it is the people who suffer from inaction: Hospitals with no doctors, Roads flooded after a light shower, Schools with inadequate infrastructure, Produce wasted due to blocked highways, and Inflated utility bills for erratic services. People don’t vote for constitutional debates—they vote for clean roads, working hospitals, and employment opportunities. And they are increasingly aware of who is working for them—and who is not.
VIII. Time To Rise Above The Statehood Crutch: Statehood is a valid and just demand—crucial for identity and autonomy. But using its absence as an alibi for inaction is unacceptable. J&K’s political parties must show that they are: More than protestors, capable administrators and committed public servants. Delhi has proven that even within constitutional constraints, transformative governance is possible. J&K can do the same—if it prioritizes performance over excuses.
Conclusion: Performance Over Excuse: Restoration of statehood is a goal worth pursuing—but governance cannot be suspended until that goal is met. People elected their leaders to solve problems, not to postpone them. The path to restored dignity and autonomy is through credible, people-centric governance under the current system. J&K National Conference and other parties must realize: it’s not about how passionately you demand statehood, but how effectively you govern today.
(The author is a freelancer. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
Ahmad Ayaz
[email protected]
