Talks between representatives of Ladakh and the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) are facing continued uncertainty following the failure of a scheduled round of discussions on October 22 to materialize. A previous meeting held in Leh between Ladakh leaders and MHA officials saw the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) reject a draft proposal put forth by the central government. The two bodies alleged that the Union government had reneged on assurances previously provided during a meeting in May.
Information reaching Tahir Rihat suggests that the Leh Apex Body has now publicly released a document detailing the proposals submitted by both the LAB and the KDA to the MHA as part of the ongoing negotiation process. This document outlines a framework for a proposed Union Territory-level body, including its nomenclature and the extent of its authority.
The two representative bodies have jointly proposed that the elected executive arm of the administration be designated as the “Government of Ladakh,” while the elected legislative wing would be known as the Legislative Assembly of Ladakh. The proposal specifies that the “Government of Ladakh be a democratically elected government exercising constitutionally guaranteed legislative, executive and financial authority in accordance with Article 371K.” This suggests a strong emphasis on self-governance within the proposed structure.
Regarding the functional scope of this Union Territory-level body, the LAB and KDA have put forward that both the Government of Ladakh and its Legislative Assembly should possess significant legislative, executive, and financial powers. The document elaborates that the Legislative Assembly would be empowered to enact laws concerning all matters listed under List II and List III of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. However, this competence would be subject to specific special safeguards intended to be established under Article 371K. This indicates a desire to retain control over a broad range of legislative domains while acknowledging the need for constitutional protections.
The proposed executive powers of the Government of Ladakh are stipulated to be “co-extensive with the legislative competence of the Legislative Assembly.” Furthermore, the proposal states that, except in matters explicitly reserved by the Constitution of India, the Lieutenant Governor would be required to act on the advice and with the concurrence of the Council of Ministers. This provision aims to ensure that the elected government holds the primary decision-making authority in day-to-day administration.
The Leh Apex Body and Kargil Democratic Alliance have also proposed that the Legislative Assembly should be mandated to scrutinize the impact of any parliamentary legislation and other governmental measures that could affect subjects constitutionally protected within Ladakh. This suggests a proactive role for the local legislature in safeguarding regional interests against central enactments.
A key demand articulated in the document is that no parliamentary law, rule, regulation, order, scheme, or executive measure pertaining to land, its transfer or utilization, natural resources, customary and community rights, or other subjects specifically protected under Article 371K should be applied to Ladakh. Such application would only be permissible in a manner consistent with the proposed constitutional safeguards. This highlights a deep concern for the preservation of local land rights, resource management, and traditional practices.
Under the proposed framework, district councils would be vested with the authority to exercise functions as may be delegated to them by the Legislative Assembly of Ladakh through specific legislation. This indicates a tiered governance structure where local bodies would play a role under the purview of the territorial assembly.
The document further clarifies the proposed competence of the Union Territory-level body, stating that all subjects listed in List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution would fall within its purview. For subjects enumerated in List III of the Seventh Schedule, the Government of Ladakh would have competence, but this would be subject to any laws enacted by the Parliament of India on the same legislative areas. This nuanced approach acknowledges the concurrent powers outlined in the Constitution while seeking to maximize local control.
The Government of Ladakh would also be expected to possess “corresponding executive authority, including control over civil administration in subjects falling within its jurisdiction.” This implies a comprehensive transfer of administrative control over devolved subjects. The proposal also stipulates that the “transfer, postings, allocation of work and supervision of officers shall vest in the elected government, subject to the Constitution and applicable All India Civil Services rules.” This aims to give the elected leadership control over bureaucratic appointments and management, within constitutional and service rule limitations.
Financially, the proposed body would be endowed with powers commensurate with its responsibilities. This includes the authority to levy taxes as provided by law, receive central grants, and benefit from statutory mechanisms designed for the devolution of funds to district-level institutions. This provision underscores the importance of financial autonomy for effective governance.
The two bodies have reiterated their demand that the elected legislature should possess the power to legislate on all subjects included in List II of the Seventh Schedule. Concurrently, the executive powers of the Government of Ladakh should align with the legislature’s lawmaking authority, with the caveat that this is subject to parliamentary laws concerning subjects in List III. This reiteration emphasizes a desire for a robust legislative and executive framework at the Union Territory level.
Central to the proposals are the constitutional safeguards envisioned under Article 371K. The LAB and KDA have proposed that this article specifically protect key areas including land and immovable property, customary practices, rights related to residence and domicile, public employment, educational opportunities, cultural heritage, languages, and the institutional role of district-level bodies. These are identified as critical domains requiring special protection.
In these protected areas, the proposal states that “Parliamentary legislation or executive action shall not displace the special safeguards merely by reason of Parliament’s competence in relation to Union Territories.” This clause is designed to prevent the central government from overriding local protections by virtue of its authority over Union Territories. The document further suggests that the “Constitution prescribe the consent or resolution mechanism required for the application of such measures to Ladakh.” This implies a need for a specific procedural safeguard before central laws can be applied to these sensitive areas.
Additionally, the two bodies have called for constitutional amendments and implementing legislation to clearly define the discretionary powers of the Lieutenant Governor of Ladakh. They argue that no general or residual discretion should be inferred in matters that fall under the responsibility of the elected government. This is a direct effort to limit the scope of the administrative head’s independent decision-making powers and ensure that executive authority rests with the elected ministers.
The proposals also include a provision for the Legislative Assembly of Ladakh to examine the impact of legislation enacted by the Parliament of India. This reinforces the idea of a vigilant local legislature actively assessing the implications of central laws on the region.
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.