The Hindu : The man and the mandate

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Mar 04, 2003

National

National

The man and the mandate

By K.K. Katyal

The good wishes of large sections in the country will be with N.N. Vohra, recently appointed as the Centre's interlocutor for Jammu and Kashmir. This fulfils the promise, belatedly though, by the Centre to start a dialogue with the elected representatives of the people, made before the Assembly poll.

The Union Government, by entrusting this sensitive job to a former bureaucrat, could not have made a better choice. As Secretary to the Defence and Home Ministers, Mr. Vohra was acquainted with the intricacies of the Kashmir problem, both in the domestic and external context, and his experience would be of considerable help to him in the new assignment. Will a politician be also brought into the picture if and when it is decided to build upon the labours of Mr. Vohra and expand the scope of the negotiations?

Though significant, the exercise to be undertaken by Mr. Vohra will be limited. The people with whom he is to talk do not include the separatists and certainly not those resorting to the use of the gun, aided and abetted by the agencies from across the border. They had boycotted the elections and, as such, are not represented in the new Assembly. Their engagement in the internal dialogue is vital, especially of the separatists not engaged in violent activities. To say this is not to play down the value of the proposed talks with the new MLAs, the product of free and fair elections.

Nothing is officially known of Mr. Vohra's mandate: presumably, he would ascertain the views of the legislators on the degree of the devolution of powers to the State (the BJP-led coalition has scrupulously avoided the use of the word `autonomy' lest it should create problems for it with the hawks in the Sangh Parivar). At various stages in the past, there were two models on the table, as it were. In June 2000, the State Assembly adopted an autonomy package approximating to the pre-1953 relations between the Centre and the State. The Vajpayee Government lost no time in rejecting the demand. It was widely suspected that Farooq Abdullah, the Chief Minister of the day, had sought to act as a spoiler at a time when the prospects of the Centre's dialogue with the moderates among the separatists appeared to improve and the National Conference feared it might be sidelined.

Then there was the 1975 model, worked out by the special representatives of Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Abdullah, the National Conference supremo then. Apart from other things, it laid down that the "State Government can review the laws made by Parliament or extended to the State after 1953 on any matter, relatable to the Concurrent List and may decide which of them, in its opinion, needs amendment or repeal''. That accord paved the way for the assumption of power by the Sheikh in the State. Partly because of the euphoria on that count and partly because the National Conference was in a minority in the State Assembly then, provisions of the accord were not followed in practice. Responsible, well-meaning commentators have commended, of late, the 1975 accord as the basis for a fresh dialogue now. Will it be a part of Mr. Vohra's brief?

A side controversy has arisen as to whether or not the Kashmir Committee, headed by Ram Jethmalani, former Law Minister, retains its relevance. A statement by its junior functionary suggesting that it better be wound up to avoid an overlap was quickly disowned by the persons who mattered. The Committee not only proposes to continue its task, temporarily suspended because of the State Assembly election, but also broaden the scope.

It had established contacts with a section of moderates but could not take that process to its logical conclusion. It counts on a counterpart to emerge in Pakistan. As a result of its efforts, the Kashmir Committee, appointed at the behest of the establishment in Islamabad, is to be wound up and a new outfit set up under non-official auspices. This could pave the way for a track II dialogue between the two countries, apart from the engagement of the Jethmalani Committee with various sections in Jammu and Kashmir.

Mr. Vohra's appointment is the third such step by the Centre in nearly three years, the other two being the appointment of K.C. Pant, Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, in April 2001 and of Arun Jaitley of the BJP in July last year. The Pant Mission was intended to be broad-based, seeking to involve the State Government, representatives of all political parties, trade unions and religious bodies. It was to keep its doors open to the "Kashmiri organisations engaged in militancy in the State but are desirous of peace''. That initiative simply lapsed. Mr. Jaitley was to initiate talks on devolution. But his mission was still born.

Mr. Vohra, it is hoped, would have a better luck. We know the man but we do not know the mandate.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National