Article 370 Abrogation upheld by the Supreme Court -

Article 370 Abrogation upheld by the Supreme Court

Topic:	Supreme Court upholds the Abrogation of Article 370
Judges	CJI – Chandrachud S K Kaul Sanjeev Khanna B R Gavai Surya Kant.
Number of petitions	23
Nature of judgement	Unanimous
Summary of the judgement	Jammu and Kashmir held no internal sovereignty after accession to India The 2019 President’s orders was not mala fide. The reorganisation of the erstwhile state into Union Territories in 2019 was a temporary move The Centre has to restore the statehood Elections to the Legislative Assembly should be held at the earliest. Textual reading also indicates that Article 370 is a temporary provision
Recommendation of Justice Kaul	A Truth and Reconciliation Commission should be set up in J&K, for an acknowledgement of the acts of alleged violations done by the State and its actors in the region.
Unique’ and ‘special status’ of Jammu and Kashmir	J&K did not retain any element of sovereignty after its accession to India in 1947.
History about the sovereignty of J&K	Maharaja Hari Singh issued a proclamation that he would retain his sovereignty Karan Singh (successor of Hari Singh) issued another proclamation in 1949 that the Indian Constitution would prevail over all other laws in the state.
Effect of Karan Singh’s proclamation of 1949	The court said – Like any other princely state that joined India, J&K is also merged in India. J&K has always been an integral part of India.
CJI – DY Chandrachud’s reference of Section 3 of J&K Constitution	“The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India.” (sec. 3 of J&K constitution) This provision can not be amended.
Purpose of article 370	To integrate the state with India
Purpose of J&K Constitution	To ensure everyday governance in the state. Being the only state with its own constitution also does not define a special status.
Article is Temporary	Article 370 is a temporary, transitional provision. It served a purpose in the war-like situation prevailing in the state in 1947
Supreme Court upheld	Presidential proclamations of August 2019 that abrogated article 370. President can “unilaterally issue a notification that Article 370 ceases to exist” Redefining the “constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir”, as “Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.” The President assuming “all or any” roles of the state legislature and such action must be tested judicially only in extraordinary cases. The President’s decision of 2019 as the culmination of a “gradual and collaborative exercise” spread over the past 70 years between the Centre and the State to integrate Jammu and Kashmir with the Union. The principle of consultation was not required to be followed during the exercise of presidential power
Article 370 was a feature of asymmetric federalism and not sovereignty	J&K has no sovereignty after the execution of the Instrument of Accession (IoA) and the issuance of the Proclamation dated 25 November 1949, by which the Constitution of India was adopted. The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not have ‘internal sovereignty’
Parliament’s power	Parliament has power to make the laws on state list when president’s rule is in force.
President’s power to abrogate 370	Article 370 is a temporary and transitional provision. Though the constituent assembly was dissolved, the power of president to abrogate article 370 did not ceased to operate.
Reorganization of the state	Carving out the union territory of Ladakh from the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir is constitutionally valid.
Elections before September 30, 2024	Elections should be held in the union territory of Jammu & Kashmir by September 30 next year and also directed that the statehood of J&K should be restored at the earliest.
J&K is integral part of India	It is evident from Article 1 and 370.
No judicial review	Every decision of the central government taken on behalf of the states cannot be subject to a legal challenge and can lead to state’s administration coming to a standstill.