Srijut Deka has done us a great favor by analyzing from particular to general. This incisive work is surely going to raise the quality of discussions quite a few notches by setting a standard. Would not it lead us to split our hair to try to understand as to why Nagaland and J & K are still not quiet despite the candies of autonomy being presented in ornate platters? 1. Can there be a flip-side?2. Do these people suffer from atrophy of thought and action that they cling on to the demands when the demands have already been met? I have a feeling that either the adults do not like candies, or the candies are considered not good enough by the kids, or memories are trying to avenge themselves upon forgetting. I am not sure which. Could there be any other possibilities that I have not been able to visualize? I remember reading a report of a widely publicized event in Kashmir some years back. There was an immensely popular moderate leader the acceptability of his views had not been taken kindly by some quarters. So, there was this dreaded 'terrorist', 'killer,' who worked for the Pakistani interests in Kashmir. He was behind the bars for life. So, the quarters, who had an apathy for the popular moderate leader, strikes a deal with him. You go and kill this guy; you buy your freedom with safe passage across the borders. One day, the dreaded killer conveniently escapes from the prison, guns down this moderate leader in front of his house, and goes on to enjoy his freedom by being cooped up in his consort's house waiting for safe passage across the borders. After the fun and frolic, the laughters had to be die down due to a burst of gunfire, where a dreaded terrorists dies in his paramour's place in an encounter after trying to escape from the high security prison!
Ram Sarangapani assamrs at gmail.com Fri Aug 13 06:20:31 IST 2010Previous message: [Assam] The autonomy issueNext message: [Assam] The autonomy issueMessages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]Excellent research, KJD. The GOI seems to have thrown in everything for these two states, except the kitchen sink. In the case of J & K, even the Pakistanis want to have a say in this matter. But, I do think this tailor-made autonomy for each state is because of a vacillating Center. Given the J &K situation as you list below, why is the PM bringing it up again? Looks like J & K already has an autonomy. --Ram On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 7:24 PM, kamal deka <kjit.deka at gmail.com> wrote: > Take a look at the' Naga- Indian' imbroglio.Article 371A ( the > Constitution was amended to accommodate that) provides various > safeguards for Nagaland.These include a provision whereby no Act of > Parliament in respect of the religious or social practices of > Nagas,Naga customary law and procedure,administration of civil and > criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law > and ownership and transfer of land shall apply to the state.IS THERE > ANY REASON,AFTER PROCURING ALL OF THE ABOVE( READ AUTONOMY),WHY NAGA > IDENTITY OR CULTURE OR OTHER NAGA INTERESTS SHOULD BE INJURED OR > ERODED ? > And yet,NSCN proclaimed its motto to be "NAGALAND FOR CHRIST".The NSCN > manifesto exclaims that Nagas are " DIFFERENT FROM OTHER INDIANS > BECAUSE THEY ARE CHRISTIANS and they could lose their identity " in an > ocean of Hindus and other non-christians in India,completely > sidestepping the fact that India is a secular state in which freedom > of worship is guaranteed by the Constitution.An valid arguement can be > made by citing the fact that for every Christian in Nagaland,there are > almost 20 elsewhere in the country.The MAR THOMAS CHURCH OF KERALA IS > ONE OF THE VERY OLDEST ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD AND IT HAS FLOURISHED FOR > 1940 YEARS BECAUSE OF THE TOLERANCE AND RESPECT SHOWN BY THE PEOPLE > BELONGING TO OTHER FAITHS.AND IF ASSURANCE WERE NEEDED,THIS IS TO BE > FOUND IN THE INCREASE IN NAGALAND'S OWN CHRISTIAN POPULATION SINCE > 1947. > > Now take a look at the custom-made Article 370 which mandates that > the applicability of every law of the Indian Parliament to J&K > requires i. consultation with the J&K government if the subject matter > of the law pertains to defence or external affairs or communications, > and ii. concurrence of the J&K government if the law pertains to > subjects other than defence or external affairs or communications. No > other state in India has such privilege. That is why the Indian Penal > Code, the Prevention of Corruption Act and rules framed for the > Central Bureau of Investigation are among the several Parliamentary > enactments which are simply not in vogue in J&K. > > As bad as that, if not worse, is the fact that many provisions of the > Constitution of India are either i. simply not applicable to J&K state > or ii. are applicable to J&K only in a modified form or iii. subsumed > by the provisions of the J&K constitution. > > Further, as in the case a Parliamentary law, application to J&K of a > provision of the Indian Constitution requires consultation/consent of > the J&K government depending upon the subject of the constitutional > provision. Again, no other state in India has such a privilege of > saying 'Yes' or 'No' to a constitutional measure. > > J&K is the only state in India -- > Where a distinction has been permitted to be made between state > citizens (designated as 'permanent residents') and other Indian > citizens (who are not 'permanent residents') and where -- contrary to > the principles of equality before the law (Article 14), prohibition of > discrimination on the ground of place of birth (Article 15) and > equality of opportunity in public employment (Article 16), -- laws are > permissible to confer special rights and privileges on 'permanent > residents' with respect to employment under the state government, > acquisition of immovable property in the state, settlement in the > state and right to scholarships as well as other state government aid > > Ø whose area, boundaries and name cannot be altered without the > consent of the state government > > Ø whose legislative assembly has a tenure of six years > > Ø where no amendment of the Indian constitution shall have effect > without consulting/securing concurrence of the state government even > in regard to disposition of the state through a treaty with another > country > > Ø whose government's request or concurrence is needed for Delhi > to declare emergency for reasons only of internal disturbance in the > state (Article 352) > > Ø where emergency declared under Article 356 can become > applicable without suspending the machinery of the state constitution > > Ø where fiscal emergency cannot be declared (Article 360) > > Ø where provisions for the Anglo-Indian community and minorities > do not apply. > > DO WE REALLY NEED ANY OTHER DEFINITION OF AUTONOMY? A PERFECT EXAMPLE > OF A COUNTRY WITHIN A COUNTRY!!!! > > KJD Uttam Kumar Borthakur _______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
