Article 370 Beneficial or detrimental | judiciary decision

Coding Gate
(TTK)SRINAGAR: Sajad Gani Lone, President of the J&K Peoples’ Conference, expressed his concern on Tuesday regarding the judiciary's handling of Article 370 cases, stating that it poses a significant challenge to the institution.


He emphasized that the role of the apex court should not involve passing judgment on whether the abrogation of Article 370 was beneficial or detrimental to J&K. Instead, the court's duty lies in determining the legality of the abrogation. The affidavit filed by the Central government primarily focuses on issues that occurred after the abrogation. 

The court will ultimately discuss the legal pathway to abrogation, rather than the perceived political or law and order benefits that followed. Lone clarified that the decision of whether the abrogation of Article 370 was good or bad for J&K is not within the purview of the Apex court; rather, it has to decide whether the abrogation was legally justified.

Lone further expressed his opinion that Article 370, which represented a form of federalism and power-sharing arrangement, has been severely criticized and vilified to the point of being unrecognizable. Nevertheless, he asserted that the demand for federalism will gradually gain momentum over time. He predicted that the clamor for federalism will grow with each passing day. He also identified the attacks on India's federal structure, such as the encroachment on the power of state governments by the central government, as one of the biggest threats facing the country today. According to Lone, loose federalism is a reality, and it will become a widely discussed political concept worldwide in the coming decades.

In conclusion, Sajad Gani Lone expressed his concerns about the challenges the judiciary faces in handling Article 370 cases and highlighted the importance of focusing on the legality of the abrogation rather than its perceived benefits. He also emphasized the growing demand for federalism and the potential impact it may have on political discourse in the future.
Tags
Top