PAKISTANI foot licker Separatists reject Supreme Court of INDIA's verdict on J&K , Oppn calls it surrender by PDP-BJP govt
While the mainstream political parties attacked the BJP-PDP coalition government for “bleak surrender” after the Supreme Court judgment on Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act saying Jammu and Kashmir “has no vestige of sovereignty outside the Constitution of India”, the separatists ‘rejected’ the verdict saying J&K is a disputed territory.
The ruling PDP, however, welcomed the apex court judgment calling it “an achievement for the state”. “The PDP-BJP government must come clean on its stand on this vital issue that could have far reaching implications for the state,” National Conference working president and former CM Omar Abdullah said.
“It is the duty of the state government to fully and competently defend the status of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir and prevent any central laws from undermining the autonomous character of the state, its constitution and the essence of Article 370. Unfortunately, the PDP-BJP government, it seems, has absolved itself of this duty in what could be an understanding it has with the central government in this context,” he added.
Omar questioned the coalition government’s agenda of alliance asking why the Centre was “using judicial route to subvert certain attributes of the state’s constitutional character”. “The Special Leave Petition challenging the verdict of the Division Bench of the J&K High Court was filed with the required notice being issued to the state government in February. The appeal was argued in the honourable Supreme Court by no less than the Attorney General for India, the top law officer of the Union government,” he said.
Omar further argued: “In light of this, two pertinent questions need to be answered by the PDP and its alliance government in the state — (1) Since we were told PDP has entered into an alliance with the BJP with a concrete agreement from the Union government and the BJP that the State’s Special Status would be protected — why is the Union government using the judicial route to subvert certain attributes of the state’s constitutional character? And (2) Why did the state government fail to come up with an appropriate and serious response considering the sensitivity of this issue and the importance of safeguarding the State’s political rights?”
The separatist leaders, meanwhile, “rejected” the apex court decision saying J&K is an “independent and sovereign entity even when India didn’t exist on map”. “The dozens of UN resolutions stand testimony to the fact that Kashmir is a disputed territory, final dispensation of which is still pending,” said the joint separatist leadership comprising of Hurriyat chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umara Farooq and JKLF Chief Yasin Malik.
“The Indian top leaders themselves knocked the doors of International forums claiming the disputed nature of Kashmir, which can never be faded or denied by the legal proclamations,” they added. The ruling PDP, however, has termed the Supreme Court decision as an achievement.
“I have gone through the judgment and read it thoroughly. We have achieved two things in this judgment. First, Supreme Court said that Article 370 is a permanent provision of Indian Constitution. And second Supreme Court has upheld our state subject laws and reiterated that outsiders can’t purchase a immovable property in Jammu and Kashmir,” J&K’s Law minister and PDP leader Abdul Haq Khan told a local news agency