STUDY GUIDELOK SABHA
DPSG MUN 2015
The Lok Sabha
Dear Delegates,
It is our distinct pleasure to welcome you to the The Lok Sabha at the maiden intra-MUN of DPS,
Guwahati. Although we are not an international UN body, The Lok Sabha has enough of diverse
personalities, making it a very intricate and detailed committee, sure to be packed with heated debate,
which we are really looking forward to.
Delegates, it is in our hands to help our country overcome the current problems that we face from
every aspect, the economic, as well as the social stigmas. We have to cut through towards a successful
shining India. Come prepared to undergo the most fulfilling and exhilarating learning experience of
your life.
We, as your chairs are expecting nothing short of diplomacy, and hope that all the delegates will not
only look at one section of the society while coming to solutions for the problems at hand, but, instead,
at the bigger picture; the picture filled with needs, demands, and dreams of all the 1.27 billion people
who call this land their home!
If it is your first time, fear not! We will ensure a smoothly functioning committee and also a little bit of
fun every now and then to keep you at your optimum. Also, a potential crisis promises to make this
committee even more interesting than it already is!
Our Agenda, Article 370 of the Indian Constitution was handpicked by your chairs in consultation with
the secretariat with the promise of fruitful debate. We hope to see exactly that when we meet in less
than a month.
Please refer to the very comprehensive Background Guide which has been prepared for you.
Also, please do not hesitate to contact us for any queries pertaining to the agenda, or any questions
regarding the proceeding of an MUN conference.
Wishing you all the best.
Yours Truly,
Stephen Irom Gatphoh
Co-Chairperson
Email: tostephenig@gmail.com
+91 89740 04104
Dikshit Sarma Bhagabati
Co-Chairperson
Email: dikshit_sarma@live.com
+91 78962 25426
KNOW YOUR AGENDA
Agenda: Discussion on Article 370 of
the Constitution of India
Quick Tip:
Tip: Article
Article 370
370 isis that
that article
article in
in the
the Indian
Indian Constitution
Constitution which
which grants
grantsthe
the
Quick
state of
of Jammu
Jammu and
and Kashmir
Kashmir some
some special
special privileges
privileges and
andautonomies
autonomies.
state
HISTORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Hari Singh had ascended the throne of Kashmir in 1925 and was the
reigning monarch at the conclusion of British rule in the subcontinent in 1947.
One of the conditions of the partition of India imposed by Britain was that the
rulers of princely states would have the right to opt for either Pakistan or
India or remain independent. In 1947, Kashmir's population was
predominantly Muslim and it shared a boundary with both Dominion of
Pakistan and Union of India. On 20 October 1947, tribesmen backed by
Pakistan invaded Kashmir.
The Maharaja initially fought back but appealed for assistance to the
Governor- General Louis Mountbatten, who agreed on the condition that the
ruler accede to India. On 25 October 1947 Maharaja Hari Singh signed the
Instrument of Accession on 26 October 1947 and the Governor General of
India accepted it on 27 October 1947. Once the Instrument of Accession
was signed, Indian soldiers entered Kashmir with orders to evict the raiders,
but they were not able to expel everyone from the state by the time the harsh
winter started. India took the matter to the United Nations. The UN resolution
asked both India and Pakistan to vacate the areas they had occupied and
hold a referendum under UN observation. The holding of this plebiscite,
which India initially supported, was dismissed by India because the 1952
elected Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir voted in favor of
confirming the Kashmir region's accession to India. Another reason for the
abandonment of the referendum is because demographic changes after
1947 have been effected in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, as generations
of
Pakistani
individuals
non-native
to
the
region
have
been allowed to take residence in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, in Jammu
& Kashmir state of India, the demographics of the Kashmir Valley have been
altered after separatist militants coerced 250,000 Kashmiri Hindus to leave
the region. Moreover, Pakistan failed to withdraw its troops from the Kashmir
region as was required under the same U.N. resolution of 13 August 1948
which discussed the plebiscite.
Diplomatic relations between India and Pakistan soured for many other reasons
and eventually resulted in three further wars in Kashmir the Indo-Pakistani War
of 1965, the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971 and the
Kargil War in 1999. India has control of 60% of the area of the former
Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir (Jammu, Kashmir Valley, and Ladakh);
Pakistan controls 30% of the region (Gilgit–Baltistan and Azad Kashmir). China
occupied 10% (Aksai Chin) of the state in 1962.
The eastern region of the erstwhile princely state of Kashmir has also been
beset with a boundary dispute. In the late 19th- and early 20th centuries,
although some boundary agreements were signed between Great Britain, Tibet,
Afghanistan and Russia over the northern borders of Kashmir, China never
accepted these agreements, and the official
Chinese position did not change with the communist revolution in 1949.
By the mid-1950s the Chinese army had entered the northeast portion of
Ladakh.
By 1956–57 they had completed a military road through the Aksai Chin area to
provide better communication between Xinjiang and western Tibet. India's
belated discovery of this road led to border clashes between the two countries
that culminated in the Sino-Indian war of October 1962. China has occupied
Aksai Chin since 1962 and, in addition, an adjoining region, the TransKarakoram Tract was ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963.
For intermittent periods between 1957, when the state approved its own
Constitution, and the death of Sheikh Abdullah in 1982, the state had alternating
spells of stability and discontent. In the late 1980s, however, simmering
discontent over the high-handed policies of the Union Government and
allegations of the rigging of the 1987 assembly elections triggered a violent
uprising, which was backed by Pakistan.
Members of Parliament, you must keep in mind this history when you come for
Session in August, and be well researched into the ongoing activities in the
Valley. It is your primary objective to ensure a better future to the people of
Jammu & Kashmir.
THE
TEXT
OF
ARTICLE
370
OF
THE
Article 370 of the Constitution of India
1. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution:
CONSTITUTION
OF
INDIA
the provisions of article 238(now repealed) shall not apply in relation to the
State of Jammu and Kashmir,
a) The power of Parliament to make laws for the said State shall be limited to;
i.
Those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List which, in
consultation with the Government of the State, are declared by the
President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of
Accession governing the accession of the State to the Dominion of India
as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make
laws for that State; and
ii.
Such other matters in the said Lists, as, with the concurrence of
the Government of the State, the President may by order specify.
b) Explanation— For the purpose of this article, the Government of
the State means the person for the time being recognized by the
President as the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir acting on
the advice of the Council of Ministers for the time being in office
under the Maharaja’s Proclamation dated the fifth day of March,
1948;
c) The provisions of article 1 and of this article shall apply in relation to this
State;
d) d. Such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to
that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President
may by order specify i. Provided that no such order which relates to the
matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in
paragraph
(i.) of sub-clause (a) shall be issued except in consultation with the
Government of the State:
(ii.) Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than
those referred to in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the
concurrence of the Government.
2. If the concurrence of the Government of the State referred to in paragraph
(ii.) of sub-clause (a) of clause
(1) or in second proviso to sub-clause
(d) of that clause be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of
framing the Constitution of the State is convened, it shall be placed before such
Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.
3.
Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of the article, the
President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be
operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and
from such date as he may notify:
Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State
referred to in clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a
notification.
4.
In exercise of the powers conferred by this article the President, on the
recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State of Jammu and
Kashmir, declared that, as from the 17th day of November, 1952, the said art.
370 shall be operative with the modification that for the explanation incl. In
exercise of the powers conferred by this article the President, on the
recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the
State of Jammu and Kashmir, declared that, as from the 17th day of November,
1952, the said art. 370 shall be operative with the modification that for the
explanation in cl.(1) thereof the following Explanation is substituted namely:
Explanation—For the purpose of this Article, the Government of the State
means the person for the time being recognized by the President on the
recommendation of the Legislative Assembly of the State as the *Sadar-IRiyasat of Jammu and Kashmir, acting on the advice of Council of Ministers of
the State for the time being in office.
INDIRA-SHEIKH ACCORD
1974 Indira–Sheikh accord was signed by on behalf of Sheikh Abdullah and
then Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi whereby Sheikh became the chief
minister of Jammu and Kashmir again after 11 years. The text of the agreement
is reproduced below:
1.
The State of Jammu and Kashmir which is a constituent unit of the Union
of India, shall, in its relation with the Union, continue to be governed by Article
370 of the Constitution of India.
2.
The residuary powers of legislation shall remain with the State; however,
Parliament will continue to have power to make laws relating to the prevention
of activities directed towards disclaiming, questioning or disrupting the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of India or bringing about cession of a part
of the territory of India or secession of a part of the territory of India from the
Union or causing insult to the Indian National Flag, the Indian National Anthem
and the Constitution.
3.
Where any provision of the Constitution of India had been applied to the
State of Jammu and Kashmir with adaptation and modification, such
adaptations and modifications can be altered or repealed by an order of the
President under Article 370, each individual proposal in this behalf being
considered on its merits; but provisions of the Constitution of India already
applied to the State of Jammu and Kashmir without adaptation or modification
are unalterable.
4.
With a view to assuring freedom to the State of Jammu and Kashmir to
have its own legislation on matters like welfare measures, cultural matters,
social security, personal law and procedural laws, in a manner suited to the
special conditions in the State, it is agreed that the State Government can
review the laws made by Parliament or extended to the State after 1953 on any
matter relatable to the Concurrent List and may decide which of them, in its
opinion, needs amendment or repeal. Thereafter, appropriate steps may be
taken under Article 254 of the Constitution of India. The grant of President’s
assent to such legislation would be sympathetically considered. The same
approach would be adopted in regard to laws to be made by Parliament in future
under the Provision to clause 2 of the Article. The State Government shall be
consulted regarding the application of any such law to the State and the views
of the State Government shall receive the fullest consideration.
5.
As an arrangement reciprocal to what has been provided under Article
368, a suitable modification of that Article as applied to State should be made
by Presidential order to the effect that no law made by the Legislature of the
State of Jammu and Kashmir, seeking to make any change in or in the effect of
any provision of Constitution of the State of Jammu and Kashmir relating to any
of the under mentioned matters, shall take effect unless the Bill, having been
reserved for the consideration of the President, receives his assent ; the matters
are:
a. The appointment, powers, functions, duties, privileges and immunities of
the Governor, and
b. The following matters relating to Elections namely, the Superintendence,
direction and control of Elections by the Election Commission of India, eligibility
for inclusion in the electoral rolls without discrimination, adult suffrage and
composition of the Legislative Council, being matters specified in sections
138,139, 140 and 50 of the Constitution of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
6.
No agreement was possible on the question of nomenclature of the
Governor and the Chief Minister and the matter is therefore remitted to the
Principals.
IMPLICATIONS OF ARTICLE 370 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
This article specifies that except for Defense, Foreign Affairs, Finance and
Communications,(matters specified in the instrument of accession) the Indian
Parliament needs the State Government's concurrence for applying all other
laws. Thus the state's residents lived under a separate set of laws, including
those related to citizenship, ownership of property, and fundamental rights, as
compared to other Indians.
Similar protections for unique status exist in tribal areas of India including those
in Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and
Nagaland. The Government of India vide 1974 Indira-Sheikh accord
committed itself to keeping the relationship between the Union and Jammu
and Kashmir State within the ambit of this article .
The 1974 Indira-Sheikh accord mentions that “The State of Jammu and
Kashmir which is a constituent unit of the Union of India, shall, in its relation with
The Union, continue to be governed by Article 370 of the Constitution of India”
.
Indian citizens from other states and women from Jammu & Kashmir who marry
men from other states cannot purchase land or property in Jammu & Kashmir.
Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, the state's 'Prime Minister' and leader of the
Muslims in the Vale, found the inclusion of Article 370 in the 'Temporary and
Transitional Provisions' of the Constitution's Part XXI unsettling. He wanted 'iron
clad guarantees of autonomy'. Suspecting that the state's special status might
be lost, Abdullah advocated independence from India, causing New Delhi to
dismiss his government in 1953, and place him under preventive detention.
Some argue that the President may, by public notification under article 370(3),
declare that Article 370 shall cease to be operative and no recommendation of
the Constituent Assembly is needed as it does not exist any longer. Others say
it can be amended by an amendment Act under Article 368 of the Constitution
and the amendment extended under Article 370(1). Art. 147 of the Constitution
of Jammu and Kashmir states no Bill or amendment seeking to make any
change in the provisions of the constitution of India as applicable in relation to
the State; shall be introduced or moved in either house of the Legislature. As
per Art. 5 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir the executive and
legislative power of the State extends to all matters except those with respect
to which Parliament has power to make laws for the State under the provisions
of the Constitution of India as applicable in relation to this state.
PART XXI OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (for reference)
Part XXI consists of Articles on Temporary, Transitional and Special
Provisions. Articles 369 - 378A on Temporary, Transitional and Special
Provisions Article 379 - 391 - Repealed - Replaced by the Constitution (Seventh
Amendment) Act, 1956.
DEMAND FOR ABROGATION OF ARTICLE 370
Equally valid arguments are forwarded by those in favour of and those against
its abrogation. Those in favour argue that it has created certain psychological
barriers. They say that it is the root cause of all the problems in J&K. The further
believe that it is this Article 370 which encourages secessionist activities within
J&K and other parts of the country. They say, at the time of enactment, it was
a temporary arrangement which was supposed to erode gradually. They also
argue that it acts as a constant reminder to the Muslims of J&K that they have
still to merge with the country.
Those against its abrogation forward the following arguments. They contend
that that Abrogation will have serious consequences. It will encourage
Secessionists to demand plebiscite which will lead to internationalisation of
the issue of J&K. They further argue that the contention of Article giving rise to
secessionist activities is baseless as states like Assam and Punjab, which don’t
have any special status have experienced such problems. It would not only
constitute a violation of the solemn undertaking given by India through the
instrument of accession, but would also give unnecessary misgivings in the
minds of the people of J&K, making the issue more sensitive.
LK ADVANI- OMAR ABDULLAH SPAT OVER ARTICLE 370
National Conference working president and Jammu and Kashmir
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was the first Kashmiri rabble-rouser to use
abusive language against the BJP leaders of mass experience. Omar
Abdullah, who invariably speaks the language of Pakistan despite being the
executive head of the State, warned the BJP leadership that Article 370 could
be abrogated only over their ‘dead bodies’. He administered the warning and
demanded resumption of a ‘sustained and meaningful’ dialogue with Pakistan
on June 25 in the presence of the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who, as
expected, kept mum. The conduct of the Prime Minister gave everyone to
understand that he was perhaps in complete accord with Omar Abdullah, who
had been creating problem after problem for India since January 2009, when
the National Conference and the Congress formed a coalition Government in
Jammu and Kashmir.
LK Advani replied to Omar’s
impressively wrote the following:
accusation
through
his blog and
Omar Abdullah, Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir State, has every right to
disagree with the BJP on matters relating to J&K. But I would advise him never
to use offensive language and words like ‘cheating’ and ‘deceiving’ in that
context.
He should know that when in the Constituent Assembly, Art. 370, which confers
a Special Status on Jammu and Kashmir state was sought to be approved, the
Jana Sangh had not even been born. However, if there was any provision in
the Draft Constitution which had almost the entire Congress Party up in arms
against it, it was this provision. This issue was considered by the Constituent
Assembly in November, 1949 just two months before the Constitution was
formally adopted. Prime Minister Pandit Nehru had left for abroad.
According to a two-volume book My Reminiscences of Sardar Patel, written by
V. Shankar, Private Secretary to the Union Home Minister Sardar Patel, before
leaving for abroad, Pandit Nehru finalized the draft provisions with Sheikh
Abdullah, and entrusted to Gopalaswamy Ayyangar the task of piloting these
provisions through the Constituent Assembly.
Ayyangar first presented his proposals to the Congress
Parliamentary Party. His presentation, Shankar notes, provoked “a storm
of angry protests from all sides, and Gopalaswamy
Ayyangar found himself a lone defender with Maulana Azad an
ineffective supporter”.
According to Shankar, “In the party, there was a strong body of
opinion which looked askance at any suggestion of discrimination
between the Jammu and Kashmir State and other States as
members of the future Indian Union and was not prepared to go
beyond certain limits in providing for the special position of Jammu
and Kashmir.
“Sardar was himself fully in accord with this opinion, but due to his
usual policy of not standing in the way of Pandit Nehru and
Gopalaswamy Ayyangar who sorted out problems in their own
light, he had kept his own views in the background. In fact, he had
not taken any part in framing the draft proposals with the result
that he heard the proposals only when Gopalaswamy Ayyangar
announced them to the Congress Party.”
Extremely upset with the rough reception he had received at the
Congress Parliamentary Party, Ayyangar rushed to Sardar Patel for
help. Sardar Patel had another meeting of the Congress Parliamentary
Party convened.
Shankar reports: “The meeting was one of the stormiest I have ever
witnessed. Even Maulana Azad was shouted down. It was left to
Sardarto bring the discussion down to the practical plane and to plead
that because of the international complications, a provisional approach
alone could be made.”
“Reluctantly, it seems, the Congress Party fell in line with the Sardar’s
wishes. Indeed it is this that explains why in the Constituent
Assemblythe discussion on this provision was so vapid and sketchy.
Apart from Ayyangar’s own speech, there was not a single worthwhile
intervention, either for, or against.”
It transpires that even while Sardar Patel and Ayyangar were exerting
hard to make the Congress Party agree to the draft proposals as drawn
up by Ayyangar and Sheikh Abdullah with Pandit Nehru before his
departure to abroad, Sheikh started having second thoughts about the
agreed draft itself.
On 14th October, 1949, Vishnu Sahay, Secretary for Kashmir Affairs in
the Home Ministry wrote to V. Shankar that Sheikh Abdullah had
changed his stand on the draft on the plea that the Working
Committee of the National Conference did not approve of it.
Abdullah, Sahay wrote, had sent an alternative draft which provided that the
Indian Constitution shall apply to Jammu & Kashmir only in regard to the
acceded subjects. The Sheikh also objected to the fact that the
proposed Article had been described as Temporary and that the Constituent
Assembly of the State had been empowered to terminate it.
On 15 October, 1949, Sheikh Abdullah and two colleagues of his met
Ayyangar and pressured him into changing the draft. Ayyangar reported this
to Sardar Patel that very day. In his letter to Patel dated 15 October,
Ayyangar wrote that “there was no substance at all in the objections that
they (Abdullah and his two colleagues) had put forward”. He added: “At the
end of it all, I told them that I had not expected that, after having agreed to
the substance of our draft both at your house (Patel’s) and at the Party
meeting, they would let me and Panditji down in the manner they were
attempting to do. In answer, Sheikh Abdullah said that he felt very
grieved that I should think so, but that in the discharge of his duty to his
own people he found it impossible to accept our draft as it was …… I
told him thereafter to go back and think over all that I have told them
and hoped that he would come back to me in a better frame of mind in the
course of the day or tomorrow. I have since thought over the matter
further and dictated a draft which, without giving up the essential stand we
have taken in our original draft, readjusts it in minor particulars in a way which
I am hoping Sheikh Abdullah would agree to.”
Sardar Patel’s reply to Ayyangar dated 16th October, 1949 was curt and
sharp. He did not agree with Ayyangar that the changes were minor.
Patel wrote: “I find there are substantial changes over the original draft,
particularly in regard to the applicability of fundamental rights and
directive principles of State policy. You can yourself realize the
anomaly of the State becoming part of India and at the same time not
recognizing any of these provisions.”
Patel added: “I do not at all like any change after our party has approved
the whole arrangement in the presence of Sheikh Sahib himself.
of
Whenever Sheikh Sahib wishes to back out, he always contfronts us
with his duty to the people. Of course, he owes no duty to India or to the
Indian Government, or even on a personal basis, to you and the Prime
Minister who have gone all out to accommodate him.”
In a clinching remark he said: “In these circumstances, any
question of my approval does not arise. If you feel it is the right
thing to do, you can go ahead with it.”
Meanwhile, Sheikh Abdullah rejected even Ayyangar’s revised draft,
and in a letter addressed to Ayyangar on 17th October threatened to
resign from the Constituent Assembly.
On 17th October, 1949, the Constituent Assembly adopted Ayyangar’s original
draft without much of a debate. Sheikh Abdullah was expected to speak,
but he remained sullen and silent.
After Nehruji’s return from abroad, Sardar Patel summed up the
happenings which took place in his absence (letter dated 3rd November,
1949) in the following words :
“My dear Jawaharlal,
There was some difficulty about the provision relating to
Kashmir. Sheikh Sahib went back on the agreement which he
had reached with you in regard to the provision relating to
Kashmir. He insisted on certain changes of a fundamental
character which would exclude in their application to
Kashmir the provisions relating to citizenship and
fundamental rights and make it necessary in all these
matters as well as others not covered by the accession to three
subjects to seek the concurrence of the State Government which
is sought to be defined as the Maharaja acting on the advice of
the Council of Ministers appointed under the proclamation of 8
March 1948. After a great deal of discussion, I could persuade
the party to accept all the changes except the last one, which
was modified so as to cover not merely the first Ministry so
appointed but any subsequent Ministries which may be
appointed under that proclamation.
Sheikh Sahib has not reconciled himself to this change, but we
could not accommodate him in this matter and the provision was
passed through the House as we had modified. After this he
wrote a letter to Gopalaswami Ayyangar threatening to resign
from the membership of the Constituent Assembly. Gopalaswami
has replied asking him to defer his decision until your return.
Yours sincerely,
Vallabhbhai Patel”
TAILPIECE
Sardar Patel passed away in December, 1950. On July 24, 1952, Pandit Nehru
made a comprehensive statement in the Lok Sabha on issues relating to Jammu
and Kashmir State. In this he strongly defended Art. 370. He also remarked that
it was Sardar Patel who was dealing with J.& K. V. Shankar, who in 1952 was
Joint Secretary in Ayyangar’s Ministery ran into his Minister and exchanged notes
about the happening. Gopalaswamy Ayyangar commented: “It is an ill – return to
Sardar for the magnanimity he had shown in accepting Panditji’s point of view
against his better judgement.
To this Omar wrote on the micro-blogging site Twitter:“Instead of advising me to show restraint, Advani Ji should devote
some blog space to explain his silence over Article 370 between 19982004”
It would not be out of place to mention that on July 22, 2008, Omar
Abdullah said in the Lok Sabha, “We will not give an inch of land to
the Amarnath Shrine Board (for the creation of more facilities for the
pilgrims) as the land belongs to us” and on March 25, 2013, he
challenged Parliament by questioning its March 13, 2013 unanimous
resolution on Jammu and Kashmir saying, “By terming Jammu and
Kashmir as atoot Ang of India, you cannot change the political status
of the State”. In between, he repeatedly attacked the Indian Army,
demanded revocation of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act
(AFSPA), condemned the laws and facilitated the return to Kashmir of
over 240 Pakistan-based terrorists of Kashmir origin.
Members of Parliament, the August Session serves as a platform for a heated
debate between, the BJP and the NC over article 370. It is advised that each one
of you is thorough with the stand of their party and is capable of expressing
his/her opinion on this issue.
SUGGESTED READING
QUICK TIP: For a more comprehensive background research, do not rely entirely on the study
guide or the suggested links. As the saying goes, ‘being a good delegate requires more efforts than
reading from the first page of wikipedia’
The following is a list of suggested documents that must be read by
the Members of Parliament, to be well versed with the issue of
Article 370:-
1) “The Truth about Article 370” -Arvind Lavakare
Document available on:
http://www.esamskriti.com/essays/docfile/RMP-Lavakare-F.pdf
2) “THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR STATE SUBJECTS CONTROVERSY
OF 2004”
-Sehla Ashai
Document available on:
http://www.earlemacklaw.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/law/law%20revi
ew/spring_2010/Ashai53755.ashx
3) “INDIA Human Rights Report” Issue 2 outlines and gives a perspective
on the abuse of article 370
Document available on:
http://www.achrweb.org/ihrrq/issue2/ihrrq-oct-dec-2010.pdf
4) The necessary text:Document available on:
http://www.kashmiralight.com/images/artilce370.pdf
5) “Article 370: A Constitutional Impediment to Resolving the Kashmir Crisis”
-Subodh Atal
Document available on:
http://ikashmir.net/slides/doc/article370.pdf
6) “Curfewed Night” –Bashrat Peer
Document available on:
http://www.amazon.in/Curfewed-Night-Basharat-Peerebook/dp/B008MXWTN8?tag=googinhydr18418-21&tag=googinkenshoo21&ascsubtag=0eafe2c2-6332-4227-b90f-1c58a316f88a
GEOGRAPHY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
QUESTIONS TO THE MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
1) Is the abrogation of Article 370 a valid argument?
2) What are the amendments possible to Article 370?
3) What should India’s stance be on Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan’s
association with the state?
4) Can there be a special Minister for the State of Jammu and Kashmir?
5) What is the future course of action that must be taken in order to firm
India’s stance on Jammu and Kashmir?
6) How does the Indian Parliament plan on fulfilling the special demands of
the people of Jammu and Kashmir?
7) Is there a possibility of a solution supported by all parties in the Lok
Sabha?
8) Who is right? LK Advani or Omar Abdullah?
9) Is Pakistan a Valid Party to the conflict?
Quick Tip: Aforementioned questions are to be pondered upon by the MPs
during the committee sessions. These are to be answered substantively during
speeches, and should be the highlights of the working papers or bills
(resolution). MPs should feel free to throw other questions to the house.