SRINAGAR: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, during the Budget session of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly, foregrounded the demand for restoration of statehood and reiterated the House’s earlier resolution seeking constitutional guarantees for the special status of the Union Territory.
Addressing the House, Omar said his party remained committed to the promises made to the people and that the government’s principal focus was the revival of Jammu and Kashmir’s status. He recalled that the Assembly, in its first session, had passed a resolution seeking restoration of the special status “as provided in Article 370”, describing it as continuing to remain on the statute books.
“We are not talking about Article 370 being removed from the Constitution. It has not been removed; it has been made hollow in its regard. We will not touch it. It is there,” he said.
Turning to the Leader of the Opposition, Omar added that if Article 370 were ever removed from the Constitution, “the next day we will introduce a resolution for its retrieval.”
He said Jammu and Kashmir’s constitutional relationship with India was founded on this provision and argued that, despite significant changes to its operative parts, the core basis of that relationship had not been addressed in recent developments.
Omar maintained that the government would pursue the matter through constitutional means, reiterating the Assembly’s earlier position and framing the restoration of status as central to his administration’s agenda for the session.
Addressing the Speaker, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said the foremost promise made to the people was the restoration of statehood and questioned why the people of Jammu and Kashmir were still being made to wait. He asked what fault lay with ordinary Kashmiris who only sought peace, recalling that people were told the process involved delimitation, elections and then statehood, and that they had participated in the Assembly elections in good faith. He said it was deeply regrettable that some political voices continued to claim Kashmiris could not be trusted and labelled them anti-national. Acknowledging that some individuals had taken the wrong path and faced consequences, he maintained that the common Kashmiri had never been against peace. He cited last year’s Pahalgam incident, asking whether ordinary Kashmiris had not openly condemned the attack and whether a Kashmiri youth had not sacrificed his life to save tourists. He also referred to the many personnel of the Jammu and Kashmir Police who had laid down their lives for the country over the years, saying such sacrifices could not be ignored.
Omar Abdullah said a “new condition” had been articulated by the Leader of Opposition — that Jammu and Kashmir would regain statehood only when the Prime Minister was satisfied that no bullets would be fired in the region. He questioned this formulation, asking who was responsible for last year’s incidents in which tourists were killed and explosions took place. If elected representatives were being told they could not be trusted to govern the region, he asked what had been achieved in the intervening years to ensure lasting peace. He said areas that had earlier seen a decline in militancy were again witnessing encounters, including a recent one in Udhampur, and questioned how militants were able to reach such places despite heightened security arrangements. Referring to claims that there had been no local recruitment into militancy, he pointed to incidents outside the region, including a blast in Delhi, and said there appeared to be a gap between official claims and ground realities.
Addressing the Speaker, he recalled that in 2019 the country had been told that violence, militancy and corruption in Jammu and Kashmir could be addressed only by removing the special status. He asked whether encounters and security operations had ceased since then. He also referred to Ladakh, saying that voices which had earlier welcomed the Union Territory status were now raising concerns. He said that Sonam Wangchuk had earlier been a visible presence at official events and flag-hoisting ceremonies as a public face of Ladakh, but was now in judicial custody in Jodhpur amid allegations that he had encouraged youth mobilisation on lines seen in Bangladesh and Nepal.
