J&K reservation, nomination Bills need more discussion

EVEN as the Supreme Court is set to start hearing a batch of petitions challenging the ‘dilution’ of Article 370, four Bills on J&K were introduced in the Lower House of Parliament last week. The two Bills that are the subject of a heated discussion among various stakeholders are the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2023, and the Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Bill, 2023.

In addition to numerically insignificant communities, namely ‘Gadda Brahmin’, ‘Koli’ and ‘Paddari tribe’, the Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Bill, 2023, aims to grant Scheduled Tribe (ST) status to Paharis. The decision to extend the ST status to Paharis, who mostly reside along the Line of Control (LoC), created a Gujjar-Pahari rift ever since the idea was mooted more than three years ago. Gujjars and Bakerwals, the two akin communities, are worried that if the Paharis get ST status, they would eat into their pie.

In the 2014 J&K Assembly elections, Gujjars were elected from the Lolab and Kangan Assembly segments in the Kashmir valley. In Jammu, the Assembly segments of Surankote, Mendhar, Rajouri, Gulabgarh, Darhal, Kalakote and Gool Arnas were also represented by Gujjars. According to the 2011 Census, the population of Gujjars is around 9 per cent of the total population of the former state and they are present across the UT, including in areas along the LoC. This number is less than 10.8 per cent of the community’s representation in the previous J&K Assembly, if one excludes the four seats of Ladakh, which is now a separate UT. As per the J&K Reorganisation Bill, 2019, political reservation was accorded to the ST community and the de facto beneficiaries of this provision were the Gujjars, who as of now form at least 90 per cent of the ST population in bifurcated J&K.

Gujjars have disputed the Paharis’ claim of being tribal, alleging that the latter have no similarity with the tribals except their language and comprise people from diverse caste groups, including upper-caste Muslims and Hindus. On the other hand, Pahari leaders have pointed out that only Bakerwals, who are nomadic tribes, actually fulfil the criterion for tribals. They argue that Gujjars, many of whom are settled and are no longer nomadic, share their socio-economic conditions. Pahari language in J&K’s context, as it is recognised today, was construed to be one of the dialects of Punjabi. It got separate recognition in the 1911 Census. Pahari speakers were second in terms of numbers after those speaking Kashmiri in undivided J&K. The Pahari-speaking population lives along the LoC in both Jammu and the Kashmir valley and that is where they are embroiled in a political contest with the Gujjars. Thereby, for the Assembly seats along the LoC, the benefit on account of the J&K Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2019, which led to the abrogation of Article 370, and which the Gujjar community hoped to capitalise on, will be nullified if both Gujjars and Paharis get ST status. It will be de facto back to the pre-2019 situation.

Meanwhile, the J&K Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill seeks nomination of two members: one of whom will be a Kashmiri migrant woman and the other from among the displaced persons from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). While there was minimal migration from the Kashmir valley, the majority of Muslim displacement in 1947 was concentrated in and around the Jammu plains to neighbouring western Punjab (now Pakistan). As many as 31,619 Hindu and Sikh families migrated from various parts of PoK. Of them, over 26,000 ‘opted to settle’ within J&K, with more than 21,000 going to rural areas. A sizeable number of the community settled in south Delhi’s Lajpat Nagar. The youngest person from this category of people (born in PoK) will be 75 years old. Practically, the beneficiaries of the nomination (to the Assembly) will be the second and third generations, born in different parts of India. There is also the question of those born to parents of whom one did not belong to PoK. Obviously, the patriarchal model will violate Article 15 of the Constitution, which secures citizens from every sort of discrimination by the state on the grounds of gender.

Migration from the Kashmir valley is only 33 years old. The idea of having nominated seats for Kashmiri Pandits is indirectly contrary to the long-term goal of ensuring the safe return of Pandits and recreating a religiously inclusive society in the Kashmir valley as it existed before 1990. Also the nomination by the political executive doesn’t adhere to the standards of substantive representative democracy. Apart from the J&K Legislative Assembly, members of the Kashmiri Pandit community were elected to both Houses of Parliament. For instance, the late PL Handoo, a National Conference (NC) stalwart, won the 1989 parliamentary election from Anantnag in a poll marred by a low turnout. DP Dhar, who played an important role during Indira Gandhi’s tenure as PM, particularly during the Simla Accord, was elected as a Rajya Sabha member in 1972.

Also, the reservation for the Anglo-Indian community in legislatures under the repealed Article 333 of the Constitution has triggered several controversies, particularly in the situation of a no-confidence vote. The higher courts had to adjudicate on this constitutional issue as the political executive facing a no-confidence vote instrumentalised the nomination provision to boost its numbers. The ambiguity can have enormous ramifications for J&K. Since 2002, regional parties, namely the NC and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), required the support of other parties to form the government. In 2002, the PDP, and in 2009, the NC formed a coalition with the Congress to make the government, whereas in 2015, the PDP stitched a coalition with the BJP.

Manipur’s volatile situation has taught that detailed homework with varied stakeholders is a must before announcing fresh categories of reservations. The border region of J&K, with its transnational challenges and specificities, is no exception. Above all, the exercise of provisioning new reservation categories and nominations in the legislative arena should take into consideration several interlinked issues, namely the broader aims of representation, creating an inclusive and harmonious society with an understanding of the region’s socio-political history and fulfilling the basic norms of representative democracy.