Asaduddin Owaisi: ‘Do you want Kashmiris to sacrifice themselves on Eid?’

Read | Why don’t you release all Kashmiris, let them also celebrate: Owaisi to BJP

He urged Home Minister Amit Shah to read the judgment of Justice Rohinton Nariman in the State Bank of India versus Santosh Gupta case as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Zafarullah. He said the Supreme Court had said that Article 370 is not “temporary”, it is a special status.

The AIMIM leader said Shah saw himself as a man with an “iron fist”, “But I must remind him that the first Iron Man in the whole democratic and undemocratic world was Bismarck, the Iron Chancellor. Even Bismarck said that the iron fist must be used by a velvet glove and in this case the velvet was Article 370 and this government has made it hollow.”

Read | Jammu and Kashmir loses special status, to become a Union Territory: A timeline

He warned the government against the issues which may surface in Jammu and Kashmir. “There will be issues between Dogras and Punjabis in Jammu. There will be issues with Dalits also… There will be demands from the Hindus of Jammu. They will ask, why should we live in Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley with Muslims? There will be migration — you mark my words — of Muslims from Kargil.”

Owaisi said, “What will happen on Eid? Eid is on Monday. Are you assuming that Kashmiris instead of sacrificing a lamb should sacrifice themselves? If you want that, I am sure they will do that. They have been doing that.”

Explained: This is what has changed in Jammu and Kashmir

“Your MPs are saying this is Diwali. Then why not let all Kashmiris come out and celebrate,” he said in the Lok Sabha.

The AIMIM leader said it was “dishonourable” to create two Union Territories in the place of a full-fledged state. “Are you planning to settle people from outside in the Valley the way Israelis did (in West Bank)?” asked Owaisi.

RSP member N K Premachandran opposed the resolution and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill on four grounds. He said, one, these were “totally unconstitutional, illegal, void and are ultra vires the powers of the President”. Two, “it violates the basic, federal character of the Constitution”. Three, “it abrogates all the Parliamentary Procedures, Rules and conventions of this House.” Fourth, “it is having an ulterior political motive”.