New Delhi: On August 9, 2023, the Supreme Court of India continued its examination of the revocation of Article 370, a provision that previously granted status to the former state of Jammu and Kashmir. Starting the hearings on August 2, a constitutional Bench consisting of five judges, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has been diligently evaluating this matter on a basis.
Representing one of the parties involved, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued against the legality of altering a relationship that was deeply embedded in Article 370. He emphasized that such a significant change could not be made through action.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Chandrachud elaborated on India’s values by highlighting that in a democracy like India, public opinions on important matters are gathered through established institutions such as Parliament rather than relying solely on direct referendums. He drew an analogy with Brexit in the UK to illustrate his point.
Another noteworthy lawyer, Gopal Subramanium, stressed during the hearing that Article 370 showcased an interconnected relationship between the Constitutions of Jammu and Kashmir and India. He expressed his opinion that certain special provisions were desired by the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly to remain applicable to the state.
Interestingly Subramanium emphasized the importance of the debates in the J&K Constituent Assembly, suggesting that they are crucial for the discussions.
Ever since the Central government made the decision to revoke Article 370 in 2019 and divide Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories, there have been more than 20 petitions challenging this action awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court.