Decode Politics: In Parliament, why Opposition cited J&K delimitation to target BJP govt
When constituencies in Jammu and Kashmir were restructured, the Opposition alleged that it was carried out to disempower ethnic Kashmiri-speaking Muslims, consolidate Hindu votes in Jammu, and consolidate Shia votes in Baramulla.
Delimitation Commission for J&K UT, headed by Chairperson Justice (Retd.) Ranjana Prakash Desai, ex-officio members CEC Sushil Chandra (L) and State Election Commissioner, J&K, K K Sharma (R). (PTI Photo) During the debate in Parliament on the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill last week, the Opposition cited the delimitation exercises in Assam and Jammu and Kashmir to justify its stand against the Bill.
Here is a look at the outcome of the delimitation exercise in Jammu and Kashmir and why it was opposed by all political parties, barring the BJP.
When was the exercise conducted?
In 2020, the Centre formed a Delimitation Commission, headed by retired Supreme Court judge Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, to create new Assembly seats and redraw the boundaries of parliamentary constituencies in Jammu and Kashmir.
The delimitation exercise was necessitated by the abrogation of Article 370 by the Centre in August 2019. Before the abrogation, the delimitation of parliamentary constituencies was governed by the Constitution and the delimitation of Assembly seats by the Jammu and Kashmir government under the Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957. However, after the abrogation of J&K’s special status, the delimitation of both Assembly and parliamentary seats was governed by the provisions of the Constitution and the increase of Assembly seats under the J&K Reorganisation Act 2019.
The erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir had 111 Assembly seats: 46 for the Kashmir Valley, 37 for the Jammu region, and four for Ladakh. The rest of the 24 seats were reserved for Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).
With Ladakh carved out as a separate Union Territory, the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly was left with 107 Assembly seats: 83 for Jammu and Kashmir and 24 reserved for PoK. However, the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, increased the Assembly seats to 114: 90 for J&K and 24 for PoK.
The Delimitation Commission was tasked with creating new Assembly seats and redrawing the boundaries of 90 Assembly and five parliamentary constituencies in J&K.
Was there any controversy?
The setting up of the Delimitation Commission for J&K was controversial right from the beginning as the Centre decided to redraw the boundaries only in Jammu and Kashmir when the delimitation exercise was frozen till 2026 in the rest of the country.
While the last delimitation exercise in Jammu and Kashmir was carried out in 1995, the then J&K government, led by Farooq Abdullah, too had amended the J&K Representation of the People Act, 1957, in 2002 and decided to freeze the delimitation exercise in the then state till 2026, like in the rest of the country.
The amendment was challenged first in the J&K High Court and then in the Supreme Court by Bhim Singh, the then president of the National Panthers Party. Both the courts, however, upheld the freeze.
The political parties in Jammu and Kashmir, too, had been questioning the setting up of the Delimitation Commission, which argued that the Commission was mandated by the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, which was sub-judice at the time and thus unconstitutional. The parties also accused the Commission of “pushing the BJP’s political agenda”.
Also, while the delimitation exercise is carried out based on the latest Census population data, the Commission said it would consider certain other factors while carrying out the exercise in J&K. The factors the Commission enumerated included size and remoteness of the area, as well as how close it was to the border.
What changes were made?
In the delimitation of the parliamentary seats, the Commission carried out a major change: redrawing the boundaries of Anantnag and Jammu parliamentary seats. It excluded the Pir Panjal region of Jammu, comprising Poonch and Rajouri districts, from the Jammu parliamentary seat and added them to the Anantnag parliamentary seat in Kashmir. The other major significant change was the carving out of a Shia-dominated region from the Srinagar parliamentary constituency and adding it to the Baramulla parliamentary constituency in the Valley.
The Commission increased seven Assembly seats: six in Jammu and one in the Valley. This meant that the Jammu region had 43 seats, up from 37, while the Valley had 47 seats instead of 46. The basis for the delimitation in Jammu and Kashmir was the 2011 Census.
The increase of six seats in Jammu meant that the 44% of population (Jammu region) had 48% of seats, while 56% of the population (Kashmir region) had 52% of seats. In the earlier setup, the Kashmir region had 55.4% of the seats, while the Jammu region had 44.5% of the seats.
In addition to the changes, the Commission also recommended “provision of at least two members from the community of Kashmiri Migrants (Kashmiri Hindus) in the Assembly”. It was also recommended that the Centre should consider giving representation to displaced persons from PoK, who migrated to Jammu after the Partition.
What did the Opposition say?
While Anantnag and Pir Panjal are geographically far-off, political parties saw the restructuring as a political agenda, calling the exercise an attempt to disempower ethnic Kashmiri-speaking Muslims. The parties also accused the Commission of consolidating Hindu votes in the Jammu parliamentary constituency by removing the Muslim majority Poonch and Rajouri districts from it.
They also accused the Commission of trying to foment sectarian divide in the Valley, seeing the restructuring of Baramulla as an attempt to consolidate the Shia votes in the seat, a move that was likely to help particular political leaders.
Share
