[Reader-list] Bill to disqualify Kashmiri women from remainingstate subjects

Kamal Hak kamalhak at gmail.com
Wed Mar 10 12:48:59 IST 2010

Sonia, the separate constitution and the state subjects are two Kashmiri
legacies I can't wish away no matter how much I may dislike these statutes.
Also I am totally with you as far as the blatant display of male chauvinism
is considered. The bill needs to be vociferously opposed if only for that.
However, one can't deny the fact of the promoters or the supporters of the
bill arguing against the voice of displaced Pandit women on the mere
technicalities of the proposed provisions. The PDP would have done well to
table the data of such Kashmiri Muslim women who for last fifty years have
married non-state subjects and posed a threat to so called Kashmiri
identity. I challenge them to produce a list of just fifty Kashmiri Muslim
women who have done so in past fifty years. The mind set and the intentions
behind the bill are starkly visible.

Kamal Hak

2010/3/10 S. Jabbar <sonia.jabbar at gmail.com>

> Please remember that J&K has a separate constitution from the Constitution
> of India and that the bill has to do with the idea of the 'State subject,'
> which, if I remember correctly was formulated in Maharaja Pratap Singh's
> time to prevent wealthy and educated Punjabis from the plains from
> acquiring
> land and government jobs.
>  Since 1947 the idea of who is a 'State Subject' and who is not acquired
> great political overtones.  For example, the newly elected Kashmir Assembly
> wanted to preserve the status of refugees who fled the state in 1947 and
> even today that person has the right to return.  However, unlike Punjab
> where property on both sides of the border was declared 'enemy property'
> and
> refugees rehabilitated after their claims were assessed, no such thing was
> done in J&K.  Thousands of refugees from Mirpur and Muzaffarabad displaced
> in 1947 still live in 'camps' in Jammu.  But their condition is better than
> the terrible condition of the stateless refugees from say, Sialkot, who
> fled
> to Jammu, which was closer than cities in Indian Punjab. These poor people
> have been living in the most abject condition since 1947 without a strong
> lobby in Delhi or Srinagar to support their basic rights as citizens of
> this
> country.
> Kamal, both Hindu and Muslim who choose to marry men who are not state
> subjects will suffer and in this it controls the woman's choice.  KP women
> who marry other KP women will not lose their status, but KP women who marry
> Bengalis or men from Delhi or Chandigarh would.  Similarly, Muslim women
> who
> choose to marry outside their community of Kashmiri Muslims would lose
> their
> status and privileges.
> Not surprisingly, in the most blatant display of chauvinism both Kashmiri
> Muslim and Pandit men can marry whom they wish and retain their privileges
> of state subject.
> > From: <kamalhak at gmail.com>
> > Reply-To: <kamalhak at gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 06:00:48 +0000
> > To: "S. Jabbar" <sonia.jabbar at gmail.com>, <reader-list-bounces at sarai.net
> >,
> > Sarai <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Bill to disqualify Kashmiri women from
>  > remainingstate subjects
> >
> > Hope the vigilante will not see an indian conspiracy in this. Apart from
> this
> > there is nothing surprising in the bill. One needs to understand who all
> will
> > be affected by this bill becoming a law. Though, it will be politically
> > incorrect to say this, yet one can't deny the main sufferers will
> essentially
> > be displaced Kashmiri Pandit  women. The bill is, therefore, a yet
> another
> > step in the process of preventing the displaced Kashmiri Pandits from
> seeking
> > their rightful place in the land of their ancestors.
> > One also needs to look through the paradox of facilitating the return and
> > settlement with honour  of wanna be militants on one side and preventing
> a
> > rightful place to a Kashmiri women for her folly of marrying an Indian
> > citizen.
> > Going through the events and politics of Kashmir during last two decades,
> one
> > can safely predict a legislation the strips the displaced Kashmiri
> Pandits of
> > their permanent residency in Kashmir because of their two decade old
> absence
> > from the state.
> >
> > Jai Ho!!!
> >
> > Kamal Hak
> > Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "S. Jabbar" <sonia.jabbar at gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:52:38
> > To: Sarai<reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Subject: [Reader-list] Bill to disqualify Kashmiri women from remaining
> > state subjects
> >
> > Shocker on Women¹s Day
> PR  Bill again haunts govt
> NC allows PDP bill for
> > discussion
> Rising Kashmir News
> Jammu, March 8: A Bill moved by PDP legislator
> > Murtaza Ahmad Khan to provide
> for disqualification from being Permanent
> > Resident (PR) of the State on
> marriage of a female resident with a
> > non-permanent resident was allowed in
> the House unopposed.
> The bill (LC
> > Private Members Bill No 04 of 2010) moved by Khan was allowed
> unopposed in the
> > House. The Bill  favours disqualification from being
> Permanent Resident of the
> > State on marriage of a female permanent resident
> with a non-permanent resident
> > and on termination of marriage of a
> non-resident female with a permanent
> > resident husband.
> The Bill was passed by the Legislative Assembly in March
> > 2004. However,
> Congress, which was then the coalition partner of PDP-Congress
> > ruling
> alliance voted against the bill in Legislative Assembly. The bill
> > was
> rejected by the House.
>  NC had then supported the Bill but Congress was
> > strongly opposed.
> The PDP legislator Murtaza Khan also moved a Bill (LC
> > Private Members Bill
> No 01 of 2010)   to provide for effective protection of
> > women from domestic
> violence and for matters connected therewith was rejected
> > by the House.
> Earlier, the government had said that it will move a bill on
> > Domestic
> Violence in the Assembly.
> ''To empower the Jammu and Kashmir women
> > so that they can fight for their
> rights, the government is going to move a
> > bill on Domestic Violence in the
> ongoing session,'' Sakina Ittoo, Minister for
> > Social Welfare had said.
> She had said that the bill will soon be tabled in
> > the Legislative Assembly.
> ³We are sure that the government will give green
> > signal for its
> implementation in the state.''
> Sakina had said the complaints
> > of domestic violence are rising in the
> > state.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open
> > discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To
> > subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe
> in
> > the subject header.
> To unsubscribe:
> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive:
> > &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>

Kamal Hak
"Zuv Shum Braman Ghara Gasa Ha"

More information about the reader-list mailing list