As hearings on J&K’s Special Status begin, Kapil Sibal tells the Supreme Court that there is “no reason why Article 370 was taken away”

The Supreme Court has started hearing petitions against the repeal of Article 370, which gave the former state of Jammu and Kashmir unique status. The appeals will be heard every day, save Mondays and Fridays, by a five-judge Constitution Bench that includes Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant. The petitions contest a presidential order that repealed Article 370 that was issued on August 5, 2019.

Senior attorney Kapil Sibal claimed at the hearing that there “was no reason” to take away the special status from the former state and that Jammu and Kashmir’s integration into India is, has been, and always will be “unquestionable.”

“The reason I say the Constitution of India was applicable to J&K is that over time, several orders issued which were incorporated into the Constitution — the result was that most powers were in tandem with the Constitution of India,” he added.

“However, the whole structure was altered. There was no justification for eliminating Article 370, he said. He was reciting the background information on the introduction of Article 370.

On July 11, the bench set a deadline on July 27 for the submission of written arguments and convenience compilations from various parties. The top court also said that the situation in Jammu and Kashmir after the notification abolishing Article 370 on August 5, 2019, as described in the Centre’s petition, would not be relevant to the constitutional question to be decided by the five-judge panel.

Omar Abdullah, the leader of the National Conference, said this before to the hearing: “We have been stating that everything has transpired is unlawful and unconstitutional from the very first day. We came to the Supreme Court with the hopes of finding justice.

Affidavit of Centre

In its brief to the Supreme Court, the Centre supported the repeal of Article 370 by pointing to a “unprecedented” period of stability, development, and prosperity in Jammu and Kashmir. Additionally, it said that there had been a decline in coordinated stone-pelting occurrences in Jammu and Kashmir that were connected to terrorist-secessionist goals. There were 1,767 of these events in 2018, but by 2023, there would be none. The affidavit also noted a significant 65.9% decrease in security personnel casualties in 2022 compared to the numbers from 2018.

Former Chief Ministers Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti responded to the affidavit by calling it a falsehood and asserting that the administration had achieved “peace of the graveyard in Kashmir.”

Mehbooba Mufti: Supreme Court must adopt a courageous stance to defend the dignity of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court, according to PDP president Mehbooba Mufti, is the only institution remaining in the nation that can guarantee that India is governed in accordance with its Constitution.

“The whole world is monitoring the Supreme Court’s Article 370 hearings. Despite having a majority of Muslims, Jammu and Kashmir rejected the idea of two nations based only on religion and allied itself with India. Assuring provisions were made for us by the Constitution. The previous chief minister said that neither China nor Pakistan nor any other neighboring nation had provided these promises.

The Supreme Court must determine how the nation’s institutions have been corrupted since it is the sole institution with the power to preserve the Constitution. Because of its overwhelming majority in Parliament, the BJP is not only toying about with the Constitution but also disobeying everything, even SC orders. Following the Delhi judgement by the SC, they introduced an ordinance, which is unlawful, she said.

Mehbooba said that in order to preserve the dignity of the Constitution, the Supreme Court would have to adopt a courageous stance.

“The only institution left that can protect the Constitution and the nation is the Supreme Court. Are you willing to take chances, that is the question. Is the Supreme Court willing to take chances as the Allahabad High Court did under Indira Gandhi’s administration in 1975? It was her.

She was alluding to the ruling made on June 12, 1975, by Justice Jagmohanlal Singh of the Allahabad High Court, in which the then-prime minister was found guilty of election fraud.

The PDP president said on the Article 370 petitions that the Supreme Court must choose between upholding the Constitution and BJP’s agenda.

“There are only two sides: either you support the Indian Constitution and the protections provided to the residents of Jammu and Kashmir, or you oppose it. I’m referring about the nation itself, not the coalition of the opposition.

“The SC must decide whether this nation will be governed in accordance with the Indian Constitution or in accordance with the communal agenda of the BJP,” she remarked.

She said that they were attempting to reproduce the Manipur scenario across the board.

On arguments opposing the abrogation of Article 370, expect justice: Abdullah Omar

Omar Abdullah, a former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, said he anticipated justice from the Supreme Court like other citizens as the top court began hearing arguments against the repeal of Article 370, which granted the former state of Jammu and Kashmir unique status.

“On August 5, 2019, whatever took place about Jammu and Kashmir was incorrect. Both the Constitution and the law were violated. The National Conference leader declared on the court’s grounds, “We will present these to the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

“We now have the chance to voice our complaints. Like all other inhabitants of the nation, we anticipate justice,” he stated.