On 16 September 2019, according to media reports, the Supreme Court accepted the petition filed by the Jammu and Kashmir People`s Conference (JKPC), a state political party, challenging „state-imposed presidential rule and the repeal of Article 370 provisions“ but refused to consider new petitions against the Article 370 Ordinance. The Chief Justice was also quoted as saying that „Jammu and Kashmir has been ordered to do its best to ensure a return to normal life“ after a three-judge panel heard several petitions concerning the state. Over the past year, we have seen no real or subtle changes in the situation in Jammu and Kashmir, based on news from the region. We still only hear about encounters, captures, etc. If someone says that the situation has improved after section 370 was removed, they really have no idea about the situation and the people there. The people there are still not entitled to many things that we consider to be fundamental rights. We don`t even know how long they haven`t had access to the internet or even cell towers. So, no, there has been no positive change or result in Jammu and Kashmir that could be called a good thing or that deserves to be repealed Article 370. I could write a series of articles on the subject, citing dozens of examples to illustrate how J&K institutions have been re-seized or dissolved. But will it help us, Mr Modi? A government cannot claim to ensure good governance if it is not democratic. Only a democratically elected government can be made accountable, transparent, participatory and responsive. To create an effective system of governance, the government must ensure that the voices of the country`s most vulnerable and disadvantaged communities are heard, especially in decision-making processes.

Unfortunately, this does not happen at all. After that, the life of the people of Jammu and Kashmir is going well and we should change some things that are not good for others. The partition process of British India was governed by the Indian Independence Act of 1947. The princely states were not directly incorporated into either dominion, and section 7(1)(b) of the Act provided that Her Majesty`s „suzerainty“ over these states had expired and their powers had been restored to them. They theoretically had the option of remaining independent or joining one of the two Dominions. However, a magazine article states: „With British forces available to defend them, independence was not a real option for the princely states, many of which were quite small. States were encouraged by the viceroy of the time, Lord Mountbatten, to join either dominion“ and did so because of their geographical location, religious identity, or other factors. The ruler of Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, hesitated between joining one of the two dominions and deciding to remain independent and neutral at that time, as mentioned in another article: The 13th. In January 2020, a Reuters article reported that internet services in Kashmir had not been fully restored, forcing Kashmiris to board a crowded train – called „Internet Express“ – to travel to a nearby town of Banihal to use internet in internet cafes. 300 rupees ($4.20) per hour. The deputy chairman of the Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Majeed Mir, says nearly 500,000 jobs have been lost since the blockade, saying „irreversible damage has been done to the economy.“ [88] Article 370 of the Indian Constitution granted Jammu and Kashmir special status – a state of India located in the northern part of the Indian subcontinent and part of the greater Kashmir region, which has been the subject of disputes between India, Pakistan, and China. [1] [2] The article gave Jammu and Kashmir the power to have a separate constitution, a state flag and autonomy over the internal administration of the state.

[17] [18] The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir was empowered after its establishment to recommend which sections of the Indian Constitution should be applied to the state or to repeal Article 370 altogether. After consultation with the State Constituent Assembly, the Presidential Order of 1954 was issued, which established the articles of the Indian Constitution that applied to the State. The Constituent Assembly dissolved without recommending the repeal of Article 370, which was considered an integral part of the Indian Constitution. [19] This article, together with Article 35A, defines that residents of the State of Jammu and Kashmir live under a separate set of laws, including those relating to citizenship, property and fundamental rights, compared to residents of other Indian states. [20] Some senior congressional leaders were openly in favor of action. Former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the removal had the support of the Congress party in principle, but its implementation was not appropriate. [153] Bhupinder Singh Hooda, former chief minister of Haryana, supported the government`s decision, saying the Congress Party had „gone astray.“ [154] Jyotiraditya Scindia also supported the government`s moves to remove section 370. He wrote on Twitter: „I support the movement on #JammuAndKashmir and #Ladakh and its full integration into the Union of India.“ [155] Similarly, Congress President Deepender Singh Hooda has asserted that the repeal of Section 370 provisions in Jammu and Kashmir „is in the interest of national integrity.“ [155] The Chief Whip of Congress, Rajya Sabha, Bhubaneswar Kalita, resigned over the Congress` position on abrogating Jammu and Kashmir`s special status, stating, „The ideology of Congress today seems to be committing suicide, and I don`t want to be part of it. [156] Congressman Janardan Dwivedi welcomed the repeal of Section 370 provisions in Jammu and Kashmir, saying that although it came late, a „historic mistake“ had been corrected. [155] 2. What was the legal and constitutional status of Kashmir before the repeal of Article 370? On the same day, the upper house of the Indian Parliament passed a legislative resolution recommending that the President of India repeal most of Article 370 under Article 370(3).

The following day, on August 6, the President implemented the resolution and revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir by Executive Order C.O. 273, which stated that as of August 6, 2019, „all provisions of the said Article 370 shall cease to enter into force“ and that „all provisions of this Constitution, as amended, shall apply without modification or exception to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Article 370 of the Indian Constitution is described as a „temporary provision“ granting the State of Jammu and Kashmir special autonomous status within the Union of India. In accordance with Article 370(1)(b), the Parliament of the Union may legislate on behalf of the State `only in consultation with the Government of the State` in certain matters provided for in the instrument of accession, namely defence, foreign affairs and communications. Other matters on the lists of legislative subjects may only apply to Jammu and Kashmir with the „consent of the State Government“ by presidential decree.