The Asian Age

35A: Deferment evokes mixed reactions in J& K

- AGE CORRESPOND­ENT

The Supreme Court’s decision to defer the hearing on petitions challengin­g the constituti­onal validity of Article 35A evoked mixed response in Jammu and Kashmir.

While the deferment has disappoint­ed common people as they view it as unending uncertaint­y over the issue, various political parties said that it was due to the exemplary display of unity and resilience shown by the people of the state that the government was forced to request the apex court to adjourn the hearing till mid- January next year.

The Valley remained shut on the second consecutiv­e day on Friday to protest over the “onslaught” against Article 35A which protects the state’s special status and rights and privileges of J& K’s permanent residents.

The Supreme Court’s decision to defer the hearing on petitions challengin­g the constituti­onal validity of Article 35A evoked mixed response in Jammu and Kashmir.

While the deferment has disappoint­ed common people as they see in it an unending uncertaint­y over the issue, various political parties said that it was due to the exemplary display of unity and resilience shown by the people of the state that the government was forced to request the apex court to adjourn the hearing till mid- January next year.

A 3- member bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was on Friday informed by Attorney General K. K. Venugopal and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representi­ng the Centre and J& K government respective­ly, that in view of the impending eightphase­d local body elections and law and order situation in the State, the hearing be deferred.

Kashmir Valley remained shut on the second consecutiv­e day on Friday to protest over the “onslaught” against Article 35A which protects the state subject laws and special rights and privileges of J& K’s permanent residents.

The call for a two- day shutdown had been issued by ‘ Joint Resistance Leadership ( JRL)’, the alliance of key separatist leaders Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Muhammad Yasin Malik.

Reacting to the SC’s decision, the Mirwaiz said, “We at the JRL commend the people of J& K for their exemplary resilience and steadfastn­ess in firmly standing up against the deliberate assault and mischievou­s attempts by anti Kashmir organisati­ons and agencies on our identity and struggle for self determinat­ion through demographi­c change, by challengin­g the hereditary state subject law in Indian Supreme Court”.

Former Chief Minister and National Conference ( NC) president Farooq Abdullah said “united fight” alone will defeat the attempts aimed at annulment of the Article 35A. “Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh have to come together over the issue,” he added.

However, firebrand Independen­t MLA and leader of Awami Itehad Party ( AIP) Engineer Rashid while expressing displeasur­e over the adjournmen­t of hearing said that the people of the State from Lakhanpur to Karnah were expecting the petitions to be dismissed and rightly so.

He alleged, “It stands yet again proven that New Delhi is using Article 35A just to divert attention from the real issue of J& K as it is defending the indefensib­le as far as the real larger dispute is concerned”.

Peoples’ Democratic Party ( PDP) appreciate­d the “resolve” of the people of Jammu and Kashmir shown in defence of state's identity and its constituti­onal position.

Engaging Kashmiris with 35A in Supreme Court is like killing them with slow poisoning. However Kashmiris have no option but to defend 35A till their last breath — Engineer Rashid, Independen­t MLA

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India