Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul Challenges the Status Quo: Controversial Insights on Article 370 and Kashmir’s Path to Reconciliation
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul’s insights on the legal and socio-political landscape of Kashmir, particularly in the context of Article 370, offer a profound blend of jurisprudence and personal experience. His views not only navigate the legal intricacies of the abrogation of Article 370 but also delve into the deeper, often unaddressed, issues that have long affected the Kashmir valley.
Justice Kaul, in his discourse, acknowledges the diversity of legal opinions, especially in light of the interview of Fali Nariman and Rohinton Nariman. He states,
“I saw the interview of Fali and Rohinton, whom I have sat with. Both I immensely respect. But then, as I said, law is a matter of perspective.”
Despite reading everything and understanding the criticisms, he maintains his stance:
“I have not come to the conclusion that in my mind what I did needs a relook. I believed what I did was correct.”
He further elaborates on the objective of assimilating Kashmir into India, acknowledging the complexity and the varied viewpoints surrounding it.
“It is my thought and belief that the manner of assimilation of Kashmir to India carried a slightly different point. But ultimately, assimilation was the objective,”
he asserts.
Addressing the criticisms regarding the method and procedure of abrogating Article 370, Justice Kaul recognizes the legitimacy of differing opinions.
“On the method and procedure, there has been criticism including by Fali, they are entitled to their view,”
he notes, acknowledging the unique political and administrative circumstances in Kashmir at the time.
Justice Kaul also discusses the challenges faced by the Supreme Court in dealing with the constitutional aspects of the abrogation. He admits,
“You are right to an extent that the passage of time does create a difficulty in terms of turning the clock. But if the Supreme Court finds something unconstitutional, there is no way I feel for it to say no, at best it could have been given a timeframe.”
Also read- Justice SK Kaul Raises Concerns Over Bail Practices In Indian Judiciary (lawchakra.in)
His personal connection to the Valley brings an additional layer of depth to his perspective. He shares his experiences and losses, including the burning of his cottages and the vandalization of his family home, illustrating the conflict’s impact on individual lives.
“Two of my cottages were burnt down. One started at the beginning of the problem, and one much later. I would not like to say why it happened. My house barely survived, it was vandalised. My family house which was very pretty survived in terms of its structure which is what we have tried to redevelop, in terms of staying there. I stayed (there) this summer after 1989, for the first time in 2023 after that. This period of time, I would always live in government accommodation courtesy the office I hold, but I always used to feel for it as a home where I was not able to stay.”
In his judgment, Justice Kaul strongly advocated for the establishment of a ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ in Jammu and Kashmir. He emphasizes the need for acknowledgment:
“There have been no acknowledgements of why it (disruptions) happened or how it happened. When endeavours are made on this front, it is labelled as only agenda but people suffered on both sides, and somebody has to acknowledge it. The whole principle of truth and reconciliation commission is that you are not punishing anybody, you are giving balm by acknowledging what happened.”
He further explains the purpose of the commission:
“Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Jammu and Kashmir. The commission should look into the acts of violation of human rights by state and also non-state actors since the 1980s”, he had said. “The army was called in, and the situation became so alarming that the paramilitary forces were defending the country. They (army) have their own method of fighting a war. It is not a law and order problem; it’s a war, and in the process, people who stayed back were affected.”
Justice Kaul reflects on the generational impact of the conflict:
“There is an entire generation of youth that has grown up with a feeling of distrust, and it is to them that we owe the greatest day of liberation. Over 30 years have passed; a whole generation has grown without ever knowing how they lived peacefully together earlier. Things tapered down, but I believe it’s time to go ahead.”
Also read-Reshuffle In Supreme Court Collegium: Justices Bose And Gavai Appointed To Key Panels (lawchakra.in)
He emphasizes the need for more than a criminal trial or evidence collection, saying,
“There should be a mechanism to provide some balm to the people who have suffered, which offers at least an acknowledgement of something that has happened.”
He also shares his personal connection to the historical turmoil in the region:
“I have heard of our country going through turmoil in 1947; my family also bore the brunt of it in some way. In 1990, I saw what happened in Kashmir. I never thought this kind of disruption would take place. Nearly 4.5 lakh people migrated from Kashmir; I thought nobody attended to their problems.”
Justice Kaul concludes with a call for societal healing:
“I was concerned about both sections of society. To move ahead, you have to forgive and forget at some point in time. But it can’t just be forgiven and forgotten if you don’t acknowledge what happened; it is this process that was in my mind.”
In conclusion, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul’s comprehensive views on Article 370 and the Kashmir situation reflect a unique blend of legal expertise and personal empathy. His call for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission underscores the importance of acknowledging past sufferings as a crucial step towards healing and rebuilding a society fragmented by conflict and strife.
Also read- Kashmir, I Plan To Spend A Lot Of Time In, Justice Sanjay Kaul. (lawchakra.in)
