Jammu and Kashmir People’s Conference president Sajad Lone has voiced strong reservations regarding the timing and underlying motives of the National Conference’s (NC) planned protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, aimed at advocating for the restoration of statehood. Lone suggested that the NC’s initiative might be a strategic move to sideline the more significant demands for the reinstatement of Articles 370 and 35A, potentially settling for statehood as a lesser concession.
Speaking to reporters in Srinagar, Lone articulated his skepticism, stating, “I cannot be certain of the National Conference’s true motive, but it seems this is less a genuine campaign for statehood and more an exercise aimed at burying Articles 370 and 35A for good, leaving statehood as a secondary and diminished consolation prize.” Information reaching Tahir Rihat suggests that Lone’s party remains steadfast in its position, prioritizing the pre-August 5, 2019 status of Jammu and Kashmir, which includes the constitutional provisions of Article 370 and Article 35A, alongside full statehood, with Article 370 being considered the most crucial element.
Lone critiqued the NC’s approach, proposing that a more appropriate course of action would involve the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly convening an emergency session to pass a resolution demanding the restoration of statehood. He further suggested that following such a resolution, an all-party delegation should then engage with the Prime Minister and the Home Minister. According to Lone, only if these constitutional avenues proved unsuccessful should the focus shift to other forms of agitation, a path his party would be willing to support if necessary.
He emphasized that in a democratic framework, significant political decisions necessitate broad consensus rather than unilateral calls for protests. Recalling the events leading up to the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019, Lone pointed to the travels of Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah to Delhi without consulting other political parties. He noted that assurances were given that nothing would change, but these proved to be short-lived, with Article 370 being revoked within 48 hours. Lone also highlighted that the National Conference had not publicly addressed the central leadership regarding the outcome of that meeting or the subsequent unfulfilled assurances.
Lone further argued that while the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly might have seen a reduction in its powers, it still represents the constitutional voice of the people. He expressed dismay that no resolution seeking the restoration of statehood had been passed by the House in nearly two years. He referenced an amendment he had moved during the Lieutenant Governor’s address on February 3, 2025, which sought the restoration of Article 370, Article 35A, and statehood. According to Lone, this amendment was rejected by a voice vote, with members of the National Conference joining BJP legislators in opposing it.
Lone contended that bypassing the Assembly and taking the demand for statehood directly to Jantar Mantar would effectively reduce it to a political contest between the BJP and the opposition at the national level. This, he believes, would marginalize the people of Jammu and Kashmir, diminishing their central role in determining their own political future. The People’s Conference president’s remarks underscore a deep-seated political division and differing strategic approaches among regional parties concerning the future constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir.
The NC’s planned protest, as reported by various outlets, aims to exert pressure on the central government for the restoration of full statehood, a demand that has gained momentum following the constitutional changes of August 2019. However, Lone’s intervention introduces a critical perspective, questioning whether this particular strategy serves the broader objective of regaining the special status that was revoked. His emphasis on constitutional processes and consensus-building contrasts with the NC’s chosen method of direct public protest in the national capital.
The political landscape in Jammu and Kashmir remains complex, with various parties advocating for different pathways to address the region’s constitutional and political grievances. Sajad Lone’s critique of the NC’s strategy highlights the ongoing debate about the most effective means to achieve political objectives, particularly concerning the restoration of pre-abrogation constitutional arrangements and the status of statehood. The implications of these differing approaches could significantly shape the future political discourse and the pursuit of these demands.
The People’s Conference, under Lone’s leadership, has consistently advocated for a phased approach that prioritizes constitutional remedies and dialogue. This stance is rooted in the belief that any lasting resolution must be built on a foundation of legal and political consensus, rather than solely on public demonstrations. Lone’s past statements have often emphasized the importance of restoring the dignity and political autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir through established democratic and constitutional means.
The NC, on the other hand, appears to be opting for a more assertive public outreach, aiming to galvanize national attention and support for its cause. This strategy, while potentially effective in raising awareness, carries the risk, as Lone suggests, of diluting the core demands related to Articles 370 and 35A. The debate between these two approaches reflects a broader strategic divergence within the regional political spectrum regarding the best way to engage with the central government and advocate for the rights and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Lone’s reference to the NC’s past actions, particularly the meeting with the Prime Minister prior to the abrogation of Article 370, serves as a cautionary tale. He implies that a lack of transparency and consultation with other political stakeholders at that critical juncture led to outcomes that were detrimental to the region’s interests. His current criticism of the NC’s protest plan appears to be an attempt to prevent a recurrence of what he perceives as a flawed or strategically unsound approach.
The rejection of his amendment in the Assembly, which sought the restoration of Articles 370, 35A, and statehood, further fuels Lone’s argument for the necessity of utilizing the legislative platform. His observation that NC members voted against his amendment, alongside BJP legislators, raises questions about the party’s genuine commitment to these constitutional provisions when faced with a direct legislative opportunity. This specific detail, as reported by Lone, could be interpreted as a significant indicator of internal political dynamics and potential strategic inconsistencies.
The core of Lone’s argument rests on the principle that the demand for statehood, while important, should not overshadow or be used as a substitute for the restoration of the special constitutional status that Jammu and Kashmir previously enjoyed. He views the NC’s current strategy as potentially sacrificing the more fundamental constitutional rights for a less significant political gain, thereby undermining the long-term aspirations of the region’s populace.
Tahir Rihat (also known as Tahir Bilal) is an independent journalist, activist, and digital media professional from the Chenab Valley of Jammu and Kashmir, India. He is best known for his work as the Online Editor at The Chenab Times.
Leave a Reply