Srinagar, Jul 11 (KNO): As the Supreme Court on Tuesday heard a clutch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370, the Jammu and Kashmir’s political parties have reacted sharply to the arguments filed by the Centre through an affidavit.
According to the news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), the former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti expressed apprehensions over the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case on a day-to-day basis after “remaining silent for four years”.
Taking to Twitter, the PDP president wrote, “…there are legitimate apprehensions about why SC has taken up Article 370 with such alacrity after their visit to Kashmir. After remaining silent for four years the decision to hear the case on a daily basis does evoke misgivings.”
Reacting to the apex court’s observation on the filing of an affidavit by the center, Mufti said that SC’s decision to not rely on Government of India’s affidavit vindicates that it doesn’t have a logical explanation to justify illegal abrogation of Article 370.
On Tuesday, a five-judge Constitution bench presided over by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud decided to commence hearing from August 2 of a clutch of petitions in connection with Article 370 of the Constitution.
“Hope the Constitution of this country by which judiciary swears is not sacrificed at the altar of power to satisfy collective conscience of people who know little about the matter,” Mufti added.
National Conference leader and former chief minister Omar Abdullah while reacting to the Centre's affidavit in defense of the abrogation of Article 370 said, “These are definitely political arguments the BJP/Union Govt can make to sell their decision to the voter but they are not legal arguments. The entire case in the SC is about the illegality & unconstitutionality of what was done on 5th Aug 2019, not whether the Govt has a strong enough political case.”
In its affidavit in the Supreme Court in defense of scrapping Article 370, the Centre stated that the August 2019 changes made to the constitutional provision that had given special status to the erstwhile state of J&K have “brought unprecedented development, progress, security, and stability to the region, which was often missing during the old Article 370 regime” and that this is “testament to the fact that Parliamentary wisdom…” was “exercised prudently”.
Former minister and J&K Peoples’ Conference President Sajad Gani Lone said that Article 370 case is one of the biggest challenges faced by the institution of the judiciary. He emphasized that the role of the apex court is not to pass judgment on whether the abrogation of Article 370 was beneficial or detrimental to J&K but the court’s duty lies in determining the legality of the abrogation.
Lone in a statement said, "Per se the affidavit filed by the Central government focuses on issues post abrogation. What will eventually be discussed in the court is the legal pathway to abrogation not the so called perceived political or law and order benefits post abrogation. Whether abrogation of Article 370 is good or bad for J and K is not what the Apex court has to decide. They have to decide whether it was good or bad in law”—(KNO)