• Don’t you think the Women’s Bill is a repression of J&K women’s fundamental rights? Shailendra Kumar The Women’s Bill passed by the J&K assembly and sabotaged in the Council by Mufti Sayeed and his party to remain in power is the victim of propaganda and ignorance. It seeks to protect the special status inherited by J&K from the Maharaja in the ’20’s and protected by the Constitution of India. It does not stop a women from inheriting property in her lifetime but does put a stop on the transfer of such property to her children. Why, you may ask. Simple, really — her children take the domicile of her husband and so naturally are not state subjects. She is free to sell the property to a state subject and her children can inherit the proceeds of such sale. A women who has lost her state subject after marriage can, by the simple process of writing a letter, get it back should she be widowed. There are many other arguments and justifications that I can provide but time and space are short. Other states have similar laws, ask yourself why J&K attracts so much attention. An honest answer may surprise you. It is a pity that the PDP lead government did such a poor job correcting people’s misapprehension about this Bill. If they had spent more time explaining the Bill to those ignorant of the details and less on trying to save their government, history would have perhaps judged them differently. • How do you justify your party’s support to the controversial women’s Bill? Is it just for pre-poll political gain? Sudeep Chawla No, not at all. Our support for the Bill stems from the fact that we are committed to maintaining the position that J&K has as per the Constitution of India. Elections have nothing to do with it. • Your party is crying a lot about Women’s Bill. Why was NC jittery in passing Autonomy Bill despite having passed the autonomy resolutions in assembly? Imtiyaz Ahmad Not passing a Bill regarding autonomy is one of the biggest regrets I have of our six years in office in J&K. We took Delhi’s assurances at face value and the subsequent dialogue was inconclusive. There are very few things I would change between 1996 and 2002 if I could turn back time but our reaction to Government of India’s treatment to the Autonomy resolution is one such thing. It was treated with contempt. The same government that was unwilling to discuss autonomy with the elected representatives is today discussing Azadi with people who have never proven their representative character. • You have come a long way from advocating Kashmir’s accession to India as MoS for foreign affairs to harping on Kashmir’s disputed nature and a core issue between India and Pakistan in your avatar as NC president. Rajesh Karambalkar How is my position any different from the Government of India’s? The Simla Agreement, Lahore declaration and the Islamabad joint statement accepted the disputed nature of J&K indirectly if not directly. Why would you agree to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan if there is no dispute to resolve? What does the Deputy Prime Minister mean when he says we are ready for give and take on the subject of J&K. What does Vajpayeeji mean when he says ‘‘Nayee sawal uthe hain or inkay nayee jawab dhoondne honge,’’ or words to that effect? J&K is the single largest factor contributing to tension between our two countries. It is the reason for the wars that we have fought, it is the reason we were living in fear of war for almost two years after the 13th December attack. Call it the core issue or call it what you will, the fact of the matter is that if Kashmir is resolved most other things will fall in to place in due course. How do you find a solution that will satisfy India, Pakistan and also the people at the heart of all this, the people of J&K (on both sides), is the million dollar question. I doubt whether you will find a single statement from me wherein I have questioned accession of J&K to India. Within the frame work of that accession we are keen to find a solution. You can hardly blame me for taking a position based on logic and fact if New Delhi has become ambiguous about Kashmir. • NC once symbolised nationalistic aspirations of Kashmiris but you seemed to have lost out this political space to PDP, which looks far more popular now in the Valley after it introduced the women’s Bill in Assembly? Abdul Majeed The Bill was introduced after pressure from the CPI(M) and 28 members of the NC. The Bill was sabotaged in the Council because the PDP chose power over passage of the Bill. Had the PDP been committed to the passage of the Bill its members would have joined mine in the Council and passed the Bill. Ask yourself this question — why is PDP not calling a session of the Council to pass the Bill now. Why are they waiting until after the elections? They do not want to give up power. If to retain power they have to sacrifice the people’s aspirations then they will do so. I will give all credit for the Bill if they pass it now, otherwise they will have to take all the blame for its failure. I would have accepted your point of view about PDP occupying the political space of my party had they passed the Bill, lost power as a result and gone back to the people to secure a fresh mandate, something I would have done if I had been in Mufti’s place. • You strongly advocated inclusion of the leader of breakaway faction of Hurriyat headed by Geelani into the dialogue process, how do you believe Delhi can accommodate a staunch Pakistan supporter like him? Dinesh Kumar S A S Geelani is not asking for anything that the Ansari faction of the APHC is not asking for, a solution outside the purview of the Constitution of India. Why then is Government of India so afraid to invite him and others like Shabir Shah and Yaseen Malik to the dialogue table? To make the dialogue process a success and to allow for a broader consensus to emerge leading, hopefully, to a solution to the internal dimension of the Kashmir issue the process of dialogue has to be made inclusive and not exclusive. It must also be rationalised. There must be a uniform level of dialogue, not a two-tier dialogue where some have tea with the Deputy Prime Minister and others have to make do with a interlocutor.
