Table, Talks and Treatment

In terms of status, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah's current position appears to echo that of Ivan Dmitritch Tchervyakov, a character from Anton Chekhov's celebrated short story.

- Suhail Farooq

In a recent political development, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was conspicuously absent from a high-level security meeting convened by Home Minister Amit Shah. This glaring omission has raised serious concerns about Delhi's defiant engagement with Kashmir representation.

The meeting's agenda revolved around the security situation in Jammu and Kashmir, a region historically riddled with sensitive geopolitical dynamics. Despite its significance, the person most directly elected to represent the voices of the 1.44 crore citizens of J&K was not invited. This exclusion isn’t just an administrative lapse; it’s a political message.

So, are we witnessing a calculated sidelining of democratic structures in favor of bureaucratic centralism? The CM, chosen by the people in a democratic process, finds himself sidelined in critical decisions affecting the region. This creates a disturbing precedent.

Jammu and Kashmir has a unique political landscape, now more so post the abrogation of Article 370 and the re-organization of the state into a Union Territory in August 2019. Since then, the balance of power has tilted heavily in favor of the Centre. The Lieutenant Governor, appointed by the President of India, has been exercising powers that were traditionally under the domain of the elected government. One such example was seen in December last year when LG Manoj Sinha unilaterally extended the tenures of vice-chancellors of two premier universities in J&K. The decision was taken without any consultation or coordination with the Chief Minister's office. This move was widely criticized for bypassing the democratic mandate and undermining the state’s higher education governance.