Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

LAB calls for inclusion of native in Ladakh violence probe team

68f3d8e294019 11810806CD KARGIL 1

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

A day after the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) ordered a judicial inquiry by retired Supreme Court judge Justice BS Chauhan into the September 24 violence in Leh, the Leh Apex Body (LAB), one of two groups leading the ongoing agitation in Ladakh, demanded that a Ladakhi be included in the probe team.

Advertisement

The MHA order on Friday stated that Justice Chauhan would be assisted by retired District and Sessions Judge Mohan Singh Parihar as judicial secretary and IAS officer Tushar Anand as administrative secretary.

Advertisement

LAB co-chairman Cherring Dorjay Lakruk, while welcoming the MHA’s order on Saturday, said, “It is surprising that there is no Ladakhi in the inquiry team which also included a Supreme Court judge. Presence of not a single Ladakhi looks strange. We want the probe to be held in a transparent manner.”

In Srinagar, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah remarked, “People of Ladakh have been pushed to the wall and promises have been made to them that have not been kept. Unfortunately, this seems to be a practice, particularly with the erstwhile state of J&K. Promises are made and broken. Now either they knew they can’t give Sixth Schedule and they still made the promise, in which case they shouldn’t have done it. Having promised Sixth Schedule, why aren’t you implementing it? It’s similar to our case. You promised us statehood. You are not giving us statehood.”

He added, “The fact is that both Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir were promised something significant. All we want is those promises kept. The promise made to Ladakh should be kept and the promise made to Jammu and Kashmir should be kept.”

Advertisement

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement