INTRODUCTION

MERITS

• National integration: One nation, one constitution and one citizenship will improve the national integration.
• National security: The state of security in the region can be further improved in its fight against terrorism.
• Government data show a decline of 32% in “acts of terrorism” and 52% reduction in death of security forces, between August 5, 2019, and June 6, 2022, compared with the 10 months preceding the historic decisions.
• Economic development: The verdict will facilitate better job creation, greater investment, and tourism in the region.
• Affirmative actions: The top court’s decision will aid in effective implementation of affirmative action for the marginalised sections in the region.

ISSUES

• Legitimises the subversion of federal principles: It legitimises the notion that while a State is under President’s Rule, the Parliament can do any act.
• Undermines constitutional procedure: The SC verdict bolstered the validity of the Presidential action that s/he could remove the State’s special status without any recommendation.
• Fails to appreciate historical context: The abrogation of article 370 failed the historical obligations owed to the state and promises made by constitutional functionaries and the verdict validated the ruling dispensation’s act.
• Judicial evasion: The Court chose not to adjudicate a question whether the Constitution permits the reorganisation of J&K into two UTs. 
• Subverts asymmetric federalism- The verdict retreats from the principle of asymmetric federalism enshrined in the Article 371 of the Indian constitution.
• Under Article 371, north-eastern states and several socio-economically backward states are granted some special provisions.
• Threatens the identity of states: The Court’s position that there is no limit on the President’s power or Parliament’s competence to act on behalf of the State government and its legislature is fraught with danger.
• The Centre could impose President’s rule to carry out extraordinary actions through its own parliamentary majority such as ratification of Constitution amendments, abrogation of inter-State agreements, withdrawal of crucial litigation and bringing about major policy changes. 

WAY FORWARD

• Setting up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission: It was recommended by Justice Sanjay Kaul, to look into alleged violations of human rights by both state and non-state actors in J&K. 
• Conducting elections: The SC directed the Election Commission of India that elections to the legislative assembly of J&K should be held by September 30, 2024.
• The Legislative Assemblies of Jammu and Kashmir was constituted under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act.
• Restoration of Statehood: The court ordered that J&K’s statehood should be restored as soon as possible.
• Improving relations through development: Focus should be given on the development of the region, to reduce regional disparity and thereby facilitate harmonious relations of Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of the country. 

CONCLUSION

The recent verdict is alleged to weaken the institutional limitations on power and undermines federalism and democratic processes. However, it rightly upheld Indian sovereignty over that of Jammu & Kashmir, while taking care of democratic elections and th

Keywords: