A week ago, a fashion show organised in Gulmarg, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), sparked strong criticism both from the opposition parties and the general public. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, on the floor of the assembly, said that he was unaware of the event. In another instance, the police used force to quell protesting daily-wage employees in Srinagar, to which Abdullah stated that he does not control the police, as it falls under the jurisdiction of the Lieutenant Governor. These instances have stirred a debate over who truly holds authority and who is the de jure ruler of the region.
A disempowered assembly
J&K currently operates under a hybrid governing system, with executive powers divided between an elected government and an appointed LG following the annulment of Article 370 and subsequent constitutional changes. This hybrid model has not only led to a disempowered Assembly but also a powerless CM who depends on the LG for key decisions related to security, land, and communication. After being reorganised into a union territory, J&K Legislative Assembly functions as per the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.
The assembly operates under Article 239A of the Indian Constitution, which governs union territories with legislatures like Delhi and Puducherry. However, unlike a state legislature, it doesn’t have full control over public order and police. Its limited jurisdiction over these two crucial subjects hampers the functioning of the elected government, as it lacks any authoritative say in matters such as the continued detention of youth under stringent preventive detention laws like the UAPA. After the annulment of Article 35A, the land came under the purview of central laws, and the exclusive residency rights of J&K citizens to own property were abolished. According to reports, since October 31, 2019, more than 2359.45 hectares of state land have already been acquired for industrial and developmental purposes. This has raised serious apprehensions in the region about the proposed mass land acquisitions and the perception that people’s participation is merely a shadow of democratic representation.
In financial matters as well, the elected government relies on the LG’s approval to present the budget in the assembly, explicitly highlighting its subservience to an appointed administrator.
Gradual disempowerment
J&K’s disempowerment began in 1953 when the democratically elected government led by Sheikh Abdullah was overthrown, and a puppet, Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad, was installed as the titular head of the government. During Bakshi’s reign, New Delhi curtailed the special constitutional privileges. The successors of Bakshi, including the populist Abdullah, were powerless monarchs who only strengthened New Delhi’s grip over Kashmir.
From abolishing the titles of sadr-e-riyasat (President) and wazir-e-azam (Prime Minister) in 1965 to the alleged mass rigging of elections in 1987, the systematic erosion of J&K’s constitutional position has been a continuous process. The last vestiges of the region’s autonomy were scrapped in August 2019 when the state was reduced to a union territory. Jawaharlal Nehru once described Kashmir as “an emerald set in pearls”, yet he never fulfilled his promise of holding a plebiscite. Decades of usurpation of power have prevented democratic institutions from flourishing in the region, rendering the cliental state governments helpless. Every attempt by the regional parties to regain the lost status — such as the National Conference’s Autonomy Resolution and the People’s Democratic Party’s Healing Touch Policy — was either ignored or met with hostility by New Delhi.
Path to dignity
In Legitimation Crisis (1973), Jürgen Habermas said that a legitimacy crisis occurs when the ideological justifications of a regime no longer convince the public, leading to declining trust, weakened institutional stability, and potential political upheaval. Genuine representation is based on granting people agency and allowing them to manage their affairs without external influence or intervention.
The path to dignity in J&K lies in genuine political representation, autonomy in decision-making, and an end to remote governance by New Delhi. The constitutional position of J&K should be defined in a way that prevents arbitrary interventions. Reversals of past commitments, such as the abrogation of Article 370, have deeply affected trust and must be addressed in any serious political roadmap. It is imperative to strengthen local governance and to ensure that decision-making is not controlled in bureaucratic structures but in the hands of elected representatives who are accountable to the people. The legislative assembly should have real power, not one that functions under the constant shadow of the central government. The fractured governance in J&K is leading to economic crisis, political uncertainty and rising unemployment. For any political process to be meaningful in the region, the restoration of statehood is not just a demand but an imperative.
The writer teaches Politics at Government Degree College Beerwah, Jammu and Kashmir
