THE CONTEXT: There is general conception that there is rise in right wing populism. Recently, Geert Wilders, an anti-Islam, far-right populist, won the general elections in the Netherlands. In Argentina, the far-right politician, Javier Milei, won the presidential elections. In the U.S., early polls suggest that Donald Trump has a chance of returning to power again. In India, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is widely expected to win a third term.

WHAT IS RIGHT WING POPULISM?

• Populism is generally thought of as a political phenomenon in which a voice of the people begins to argue that they are being kept out of power by some elite forces in society.
• The distinction between left-wing and right-wing populism lies at the roots of the de-legitimisation of the system.
• Left-wing populists argue that the masses, the working class are not being allowed to influence public policy because the political elites, dominated by capitalist interests are exerting undue influence on the system.
• The right-wing populists argue whether the liberal, democratic project of inclusion is legitimate. They target racial, religious minorities in society and suggest that these groups are not loyal citizens and so their voices are illegitimate.
• There is a mix of economic appeals with identity appeals to form the version of right-wing populism.

TRENDS OF RISING RIGHT WING POPULISM:

• Systematic destruction of public institutions in three ways:

1. By interpreting rules differently

2. By changing rules incrementally, such as by bringing in a Bill in India regulating the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner

3. By completely displacing rules, such as in the abrogation of Article 370 (in Jammu and Kashmir).

• Trend of ethno-nationalist identity-based grievances: There is a trend of fuelling the ethno-nationalist identity-based grievances that there are people, both outside and within the country, to blame for many of the ills that are going on.
• Trends of appeals: There are different kinds of appeals being made to win the elections.

In Argentina, with long standing economic crisis allows Mr. Milei to make the powerful appeal about 40 years of austerity measures and blaming the elites and the international economic system for this. In Hungary, for Viktor Orban, it was about migrants, but within the context of the European Union. In the Netherlands, India, or France, these actors have been around in the party system as fringe elements for a long time. They become powerful by fuelling support for grievances and the collapse of the centrist parties.

ISSUES:

• Broader crisis of governance: There is a broader crisis of governance. Generally the work of government is of spending tax revenues on building better roads and highways, clean water and health facilities. However, globalisation, corruption and bureaucratic ineffectiveness mean that many developing countries lack the fiscal space to do all this. When governments lack fiscal resources to effectively conduct public policy, they resort to other ways of winning elections, such as making identity appeals. This shows a lack of trust in the act of governance and in democracy.
• Undermines democratic institutions: This phase of populism has a majoritarian, ethno-nationalist flavour. There can be a Muslim ‘other’ to the Hindus, or a Tamil ‘other’ to the Sinhalese, or a Muslim ‘other’ to Christians, or a non-White ‘other’ to the White people. The manner in which this ‘othering’ is happening undermines democratic institutions.
• Personification of election: There is growing personification of election where election is not based on political party but on a single person. For example, Javier Milei in Argentina was able to make himself the focus of that election. Over the last eight years, Mr. Trump has been taking the Republican Party and making it all about himself. Therefore, it becomes more about the test of loyalty to the person rather than party values.

THE CONCLUSION:

It can be concluded that there are numerous conditions that provide the ground for rise of right wing populism in the world. Certain events such as the financial crisis and the migrant crisis propelled these sentiments further. However, these issues need to be addressed wisely without any political bias for the inclusive growth and governance.

UPSC PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 ‘Indian diaspora has a decisive role to play in the politics and economy of America and European Countries’. Comment with examples. (2020)

Q.2 ‘The long sustained image of India as a leader of the oppressed and marginalised nations has disappeared on account of its newfound role in the emerging global order.’ Elaborate. (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Q.1 Critically examine the socio-economic implications of resurgence of right-wing populism which is a recent phenomenon seen in the global scenarios.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/is-right-wing-populism-seeing-a-resurgence-across-the-world/article67684886.ece

THE CONTEXT: The Supreme Court of India recently unanimously upheld the actions of the Indian government.  Though, abrogation of Article 370 can be held politically correct, concern arises as it lets the Centre get away with violating the constitution and federal principles.

MORE ON THE NEWS:

• The decision has been upheld, in three judgments, one main and two concurring of the Constitution Bench of five judges of the Supreme Court which has facilitated a complete integration of Jammu and Kashmir into the Union of India.
• The unanimous judgment would have been welcomed but this is not all that happened as is facing criticism because of below mentioned reasons.

ISSUES:

• Against constitution and federal principles: Actions taken by the Centre was neither according to the provisions of the Constitution, nor in accordance with well-settled principles of federalism which is a basic feature of the Constitution.
• Diminution without consent of state assembly: Under Article 370 of the Constitution, Article 3 was applied to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. It came with a condition that its area would not be diminished by the executive nor by Parliament, without the consent of the J&K State Assembly. However, contrary to this assurance, a very substantial diminution of the area of the State of J&K held without the consent of the inhabitants of Jammu and Kashmir.
• Change of status quo: Recent judgments led not only diminution of the area of the state of Jammu and Kashmir but its status too was unilaterally altered from state to Union Territory a situation not justified by any provision in the Constitution.
• Threat to Federalism: The powers of the Union government with respect to states seem to be enhanced by the verdict, which could be politically unstable. As it could lead to threat to federal principles.
• Concerns of Parliamentary Sovereignty: There are concerns that the  Union can impose the President’s Rule first and then substitute parliamentary approval in place of the Assembly even for highly divisive issues like the splitting of a state.
• Powers of the President under Article 370(1) (d): The President’s power under the Article was not a “constituent power” but merely a power to apply provisions with “modifications and exceptions.”  Thus, abrogation of Article 370 without the consent of State’s Constituent Assembly is not right.
• Violating constituent assembly: Another important safeguard for the state of Jammu & Kashmir had been set out in Article 370 (3) itself as enacted in1950. It states power of the President under Article 370 to declare the entire Article 370 inoperative can come into effect only if the precondition was fulfilled the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the state of Jammu & Kashmir. Disregarding this,
• Wrong interpretation by the court: The conclusion of the Court that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly is not binding on the President was based on the Court’s erroneous interpretation of Article 370 (3) as being in two separate parts. The court wrongly states that the power under Article 370 (3) did not cease to exist upon the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.

THE WAY FORWARD:

• Revisit judgment: SC should act proactively and revisit its judgment of upholding the abrogation of Article 370 by the centre which was done without consulting state legislature.
• Restoring normalcy: There is a need of restoring normalcy in the region for trust-building. It can be done by fostering dialogue and engaging local leaders for peaceful conduction of democratic elections and restoration of the statehood of J&K.
• Ensuring Governance: There is a need for inclusive governance for addressing diverse aspirations of the region.
• Economic development: The imminent focus of the government must be on promoting inclusive economic development of the region by effective implementation of the affirmative policies of the government.
• Establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commission: Justice Kaul, in his concurring opinion, suggested the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Jammu and Kashmir. This commission would be tasked with acknowledging and addressing alleged rights violations in the region, indicating a commitment to justice and reconciliation. It should be established as soon as possible.

THE CONCLUSION:

The present decision of the Supreme Court upholding the centre’s decision is not constitutionally correct. It undermines federalism and democratic processes in the region. There should be a collective action to ensure good governance in the region upholding the constitutional provisions.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note “Temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”, temporary? Discuss The future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity. (2016)

Q.2 The banning of ‘Jamaat-e-islaami’ in Jammu and Kashmir brought into focus the role of over- ground workers (OGWs) in assisting terrorist organizations. Examine the role played by OGWs inassisting terrorist organizations in insurgency affected areas. Discuss measures to neutralize the influence of OGWs. (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION

Q.1 Critically examine the constitutional implications of the SC judgement upholding the centre’s decision of abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution.

SOURCE: https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-verdict-on-article-370-fali-s-nariman-abbrogation-of-article-370-jammu-and-kashmir-9072109/

TAG: GS 2: POLITY AND GOVERNANCE

THE CONTEXT: While India’s Constitution tilts towards the Centre on certain areas, not all states are equal either. Right after Article 370, the Constitution creates special provisions for at least nine states, from Article 371A-I.

EXPLANATION:

Quasi-Federal Structure of Indian Governance

• India’s constitutional framework reflects a quasi-federal structure, balancing the Centre’s authority with varying degrees of autonomy granted to states.
• The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution delineates Union, State, and Concurrent lists, outlining legislative powers shared between the Centre and states.
• However, certain provisions tilt authority towards the Centre in specific domains.

Understanding Special Status for States

• India’s diverse landscape necessitates differentiated approaches in governance, leading to special provisions for various states based on fiscal, political, and administrative considerations.
• These provisions aim to address regional disparities while fostering unity within the federal structure.
• However, critics argue that such asymmetric federalism could sow seeds of regionalism and impact national integration.

Examples of Special Status

• Beyond Article 370:
  • While Article 370 is a well-known instance of asymmetric federalism concerning Jammu and Kashmir, there exist special provisions for nine states, ranging from Article 371A-I.
  • These provisions fall under the Constitution’s section titled “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions,” intended to operate until crises like secessionist sentiments or conflicts cease.
  • Importantly, they lack explicit expiration dates.
• Negotiated Autonomy:
  • States like Nagaland and Mizoram negotiated autonomy with the Centre as a political compromise, safeguarding cultural practices, land ownership, and natural resources from parliamentary interference.
  • These special provisions were pivotal in resolving independence movements in these regions.
• Delhi’s Unique Arrangement:
  • Delhi, not classified as a state in the Constitution’s First Schedule, operates under Article 239AA, granting it legislative powers over state and concurrent list subjects.
  • This unique arrangement exemplifies a special status designed for the administration of the national capital.

Legal Interpretations and Recent Rulings

• Challenges and Interpretations:
  • The abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir led to legal challenges asserting that it conferred internal sovereignty, which couldn’t be unilaterally revoked.
  • However, a Supreme Court ruling clarified that Article 370 represented asymmetric federalism, distinct from internal sovereignty.

Conclusion

• The existence of special provisions for select Indian states reflects the nuanced approach to governance, accommodating diverse needs within the federal framework.
• While these provisions aim to address regional disparities and political compromises, ongoing debates persist regarding their impact on national integration and the duration of their applicability, signalling the complex interplay between federalism and the unity of the Indian nation.

SOURCE: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/everyday-explainers/why-many-states-in-india-enjoy-special-provisions-9068631/

THE CONTEXT: More than four years after the abrogation of Article 370, the Supreme Court of India, recently, unanimously upheld the actions of the Indian government. While much of the discourse around the judgment has focused on the question of statehood, the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was at the heart of the matter as well.

SPECIAL STATUS OF ARTICLE 370:

• Basic Principles committee’s report, based on which the State Constitution was drafted, stated: ‘The sovereignty of the State resides in the people thereof and shall except in regard to matters specifically entrusted to the Union be exercised on their behalf by the various organs of the State.
• The State’s legislature will have powers to make laws for the State in respect of all matters falling within the sphere of its residuary sovereignty’.

ANALYSING THE SC JUDGEMENT:

• To arrive at its conclusions, the Court employs a historical, textual, and structural interpretation of the Constitution of India, and all three approaches are deeply informed by constitutional monism.
• There are the sites where the Court employs a monist reading of the Constitution, and it sets a dangerous precedent for federalism in India.

Federalism and constitutional sovereignty

• Union Constitution as sole bearer of sovereignty: The monism that is reflected in the judgment imagines the Union Constitution as the sole bearer of internal and external sovereignty. Unlike this, Article 370 laid down an elaborate framework for the distribution of powers and authority between the Union and the State governments.
• Non recognition of shared sovereignty: By focusing more on the particular concept of sovereignty ‘which requires no subordination to another body’, the Court ends up refusing to recognise the shared sovereignty model of Article 370. Sovereignty in federal constitutions is not a binary concept but it encompasses various dimensions and exists along a spectrum of degrees.

The contingency of the presidential power

• Unbridled power of constituent assembly: Another site where the Court’s monism operates is in its reading of Clause 3 of Article 370. The Court rejects the argument that Article 370 had gained permanence after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. It stated that it is premised on the understanding that the constitutional body had unbridled power to alter the constitutional integration of the State with the Union’. In a constitutional democracy, no body or institution has unbridled powers. Further, Clause 3 of Article 370 is primarily concerned with the relationship of two powers and not just the status or the relationship of the power-bearing entities.
• Presidential power to abrogate Article 370: The proviso to Clause 3 makes it clear that the presidential power to abrogate Article 370 was contingent on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly. As it is in the nature of the presidential powers under Clause 3 to be contingent on the Constituent Assembly, this limitation does not die with the dissolution of the Assembly. The relation of powers here does not mean that the President becomes ‘subordinate’ to the Constituent Assembly but that power as a federal arrangement has been distributed across multiple axes under Article 370.  President’s limitless power to abrogate Article 370 makes State’s Constitution inoperative .It led to application of the Indian Constitution to the State of Jammu and Kashmir which severely affects the federalism and constitutional democracy.

STATE’S VIEWS

• Non binding nature of state’s view: The judgment’s monism imagines popular sovereignty as a monolith where since the views of an individual state for the purposes of reorganisation are not binding on There are many sites within the Constitution where a recommendatory power is vested in a body. Merely because that power may not be binding does not mean that the power can be taken over by another body or that power need not be exercised.
• Unequal nature of states: The inevitable conclusion that one arrives at is that the popular sovereignty of a State’s people vis-à-vis the State becomes subordinate to the popular sovereignty of the entire nation vis-à-vis the Union as well as the States. This is particularly worrying in the context of J&K where the threshold for reorganising the State was historically much higher compared to the other States.

THE CONCLUSION:

The Court by relying on a monist reading of the Constitution has not only upheld the abrogation of Article 370 but has also put its stamp on the approval of the silencing of the voice of the people of the former State of J&K. At the same time, misuse of the President’s rule to bring irrevocable changes to the states like bifurcation of the state without consulting the state legislative assemblies undermines federal principles.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note “Temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”, temporary? Discuss The future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity. (2016)

Q.2 The banning of ‘Jamaat-e-islaami’ in Jammu and Kashmir brought into focus the role of over- ground workers (OGWs) in assisting terrorist organizations. Examine the role played by OGWs in assisting terrorist organizations in insurgency affected areas. Discuss measures to neutralize the influence of OGWs. (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION

Q.1 What is constitutional monism? Examine the Supreme Court’s judgment on the abrogation of Art 370 in the context of the principle of  constitutional monism which seems to affect federalism and constitutional democracy in India.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article-370-judgment-is-a-case-of-constitutional-monism/article67635313.ece

THE CONTEXT: The SC upheld the decision to abrogate the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370. At the same time, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court expressly directed that the Election Commission of India (ECI) must conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of J&K by September 30, 2024.

STATUS OF ELECTIONS IN J&K

• J&K remains among India’s most conflict-prone regions due to historical reasons related to integration of the erstwhile princely State into the Indian Union and later due to accumulated grievances over the conduct of democratic processes.
• Even when periodic and regular elections were conducted during the height of the militancy, participation was limited in many parts of the Valley, denoting the dissatisfaction with the political system.
• However, since the early-mid 2000s when electoral participation improved, and J&K’s citizens began to partake in the democratic process to get their concerns addressed.
• Then again due to agitations and protests by separatists over security policies and later due to steps taken by union government led to the current situation.
• In the last five and a half years, local government elections have been held with varying levels of participation indicating that the citizens in the state have been against the measures that have been implemented since 2018.
• It is welcome step that the Court has set a deadline to conduct the long-delayed elections in J&K, which has been under spells of Governor’s Rule and President’s Rule since 2018 and without a Legislative Assembly.

ISSUES:

• Delayed statehood: There is long standing demand of statehood that is being delayed unnecessarily. Even the recent SC judgment does not press the government to restore statehood to the bifurcated Union Territory. It could have directed the Union government to restore statehood by a specified date, as there remains no reason for the continuance of J&K as a Union Territory.
• Democratic process: Jammu and Kashmir has not seen legislative elections for nine years. The last Assembly election took place in 2014, and the last elected administration fell in June 2018. The delay in holding Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir has raised questions about the democratic process in the region. Despite assurances that the administration is ready whenever the Election Commission of India (ECI) decides, the recent announcement of a committee to look into simultaneous State and Union elections suggests that elections are unlikely to happen soon.
• Representation: The recommendations of the Delimitation Commission raised concerns about equal representation, affecting the democratic principle of equal representation. Further complicating matters were changes in residency rules that allowed a significant number of new voters to be added to the existing voter pool. The expansion of reserved seats and the inclusion of more groups in the Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes categories could exacerbate competition within these categories. This led to concerns about the denial of democratic rights and constitutional obligations.
• Increasing militancy: Despite steps taken for maintaining peace in the state, political instability, separatism and Pakistan-sponsored terrorism continue to surround the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

THE WAY FORWARD:

• Early conduction of election: By conducting speedy assembly election, it is believed that elected representatives could address issues such as unemployment and land rights more effectively. Holding an Assembly election at the earliest could bring stability in the region.
• Deadline for statehood: As with elections, the Supreme Court should have given a deadline for restoration of statehood too. Restoration of statehood is an important measure as this guarantees a degree of federal autonomy to the province. It allows the elected government to be able to better address the concerns of the electorate than depend on the representatives of the Union government.
• Trust and confidence building: It is crucial to address the concerns and expectations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Delaying the democratic process undermines the region’s confidence in the political system. To build trust and stability, it is essential to ensure that free and fair election while giving representative of the diverse population.
• Outreach programme: Government can mitigate the challenges arising out of action on article 370 by launching a comprehensive outreach programme to all Kashmiris.
• International image: India’s unique selling proposition as a leader in the Global South can only be achieved if it sets precedent for conduct of formal democratic process in the country. It can be done by conflict resolution in places such as Kashmir.

THE CONCLUSION:

The delay in holding Assembly elections has led to widespread discontent in the region. People are concerned about the shrinking number of their representatives and the potential impact of new reservations on political dynamics.  It is time for the restoration of popular government as well as Statehood in J&K and elections should be held at earliest and for that strong political will is required.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note “Temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”, temporary? Discuss The future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity. (2016)

Q.2 The banning of ‘Jamaat-e-islaami’ in Jammu and Kashmir brought into focus the role of over-ground workers (OGWs) in assisting terrorist organizations. Examine the role played by OGWs in assisting terrorist organizations in insurgency affected areas. Discuss measures to neutralize the influence of OGWs. (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Q) The abrogation of Article 370 was 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. Critically discuss the statement in the light of the SC verdict upholding the abrogation of Art 370.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/welcome-direction-the-hindu-editorial-on-the-supreme-courts-deadline-to-conduct-elections-in-jk/article67631471.ece

THE CONTEXT: The SC has upheld the government’s decision to abrogate Article 370, which conferred special status on the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir and said steps should be taken to conduct elections in the assembly by September 30, 2024. However, it has received criticism and opposition termed the “manner” in which the abrogation of Article 370 took place as “unconstitutional.”

REASONS FOR ABROGATION:

Temporary Provision: Article 370 is titled “Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”. This suggests it wasn’t meant to be permanent.

Uniformity: Removal can lead to the uniform application of Indian laws to Jammu & Kashmir, integrating it fully with India.

Development & Growth: It was believed that removal can boost the region’s development, as it would get equal attention and opportunities like other states.

Limited Integration: It was argued that Article 370 has hindered the full integration of Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of India. They believe that the provision has perpetuated a sense of separatism and prevented the region from fully embracing its Indian identity.

ISSUES RAISED BY OPPOSITION:

Federal interest: In upholding the removal of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, the Supreme Court of India has imperilled the rights of States. It represents not merely judicial deference, but a retreat from the Court’s known positions on federalism, democratic norms and the sanctity of legal processes. The most potent attack on federal principles is the Court’s conclusion that Parliament, while a State is under President’s Rule, can do any act, legislative or otherwise on behalf of the State legislature. This alarming interpretation undermines the basic feature of the Constitution as enunciated by the Court itself and may have grave implications for the rights of States.

Violating constitutional provisions:  Article 370, whether it was temporary or not, is a provision of the Indian Constitution. As per, Article 368 any provision of the Constitution has to be amended by the Parliament with a requisite majority. But abrogation was not done in accordance with that is termed as invalid.

Undermined historical context: The Instrument of Accession was like a treaty between two sovereign countries that had decided to work together. The SC verdict fails to appreciate historical context and undermines constitutional procedure by striping Kashmir of its special status and bring it on a par with other States.

Did not consult elected representative: The government seems to have acted in a mala fide manner by imposing President’s Rule for the intended abrogation of special status without the need to involve any elected representative from J&K. As, in the reorganisation of the state, the Presidential order also requires the concurrence of the government of the state. However, since Jammu & Kashmir is currently under Governor’s rule, the Governor’s concurrence is deemed to be the government’s concurrence.

THE WAY FORWARD:

Preserving Regional Identity: One of the primary rationales behind Article 370 was to respect and preserve the unique identity, history, and culture of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. There should be adequate steps by the union government to address the same.

Upholding Democratic Principles: Article 370 exemplifies India’s commitment to democratic principles by respecting the choice of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to have their own constitution and laws. There is a need to uphold democratic principles emphasizing the importance of a government accountable to the people it serves.

Safeguarding Federal principles: The state is an integral part of India with unique privileges and autonomy. There is a need to safeguard and enhance the autonomy and rights of the state the face of increasing centralization and interference from the Centre.

Addressing Historical Context: The inclusion of Article 370 was a response to the specific historical context of Jammu and Kashmir’s accession to India after independence in 1947. The provision was a result of negotiations between the leaders of the state and the Indian government to address the concerns and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. This historical context should be kept in mind when taking any step that is irreversible in nature.

THE CONCLUSION:

The recent SC verdict though rightly upheld Indian sovereignty over J&K,  undermines federalism and democratic processes to a frightening degree. There is a need for holistic approach for a successful transition, combining economic growth, inclusive governance ensuring a brighter future for the region while upholding its sovereignty and integrity.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note “Temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”, temporary? Discuss The future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity. (2016)

Q.2 The banning of ‘Jamaat-e-islaami’ in Jammu and Kashmir brought into focus the role of over-ground workers (OGWs) in assisting terrorist organizations. Examine the role played by OGWs in assisting terrorist organizations in insurgency affected areas. Discuss measures to neutralize the influence of OGWs. (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Q.1 With the verdict on Article 370 petitions, the Supreme Court (SC) has drawn to a close a historical legal battle that has recast Jammu and Kashmir’s constitutional relationship with the Union of India. Comment.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/ominously-anti-federal-on-the-supreme-courts-judgement-on-article-370-and-jks-special-status/article67628150.ece