India’s Kashmir Policy Faces Scrutiny Amid Proposed Constitutional Amendments

New Delhi’s approach to Jammu and Kashmir is under renewed scrutiny as India’s key human rights groups received an invitation from a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to discuss proposed constitutional amendments, including those related to the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act of 2019. While initially welcomed as a potential shift towards consensus-based policymaking, concerns have emerged that the amendments primarily aim to facilitate the removal of elected officials under the guise of combating corruption.

Proposed Amendments and Concerns

The draft amendment, dated August 19, 2025, outlines provisions for removing a minister who is arrested and detained on charges with a potential imprisonment term of five years or more. Critics argue this provision “smacks of a design to facilitate political coup in opposition-ruled states,” and will further undermine the public mandate in Kashmir, where New Delhi has already established a dual power structure through an expanded role for the lieutenant governor [1].

The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019: A Recap

The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, enacted on August 9, 2019, and effective October 31, 2019, bifurcated the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories: the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (with a legislature) and the Union Territory of Ladakh (without a legislature) [2]. This decision ended Jammu and Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status. Despite assurances to the Supreme Court and Parliament, New Delhi has not restored statehood, stating a decision will be made “at an apt time.”

Political Maneuvering and Negotiations

National Conference leader Omar Abdullah assumed power in October 2024, but New Delhi has been hesitant to transfer key executive powers to him. Back-channel negotiations between Abdullah’s emissaries and the Ministry of Home Affairs have reportedly reached 90% agreement on amending business rules to transfer several ministries from the lieutenant governor – currently Manoj Sinha – to the chief minister.

Skepticism and Concerns over Intent

Journalist Anuradha Bhasin expressed skepticism about the negotiations, suggesting that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), aim for a less empowered Muslim-majority region [2]. Concerns also exist regarding the Modi government’s broader legislative efforts to make elected representatives more easily removable.

Rising Tensions and Regional Dynamics

Recent geopolitical events, such as India’s response to the Israeli-U.S. Military offensive and the subsequent shutdown in Kashmir following the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, may further complicate the situation. These dynamics could deter New Delhi from offering political compromises to Abdullah’s government, fearing it might be perceived as a concession under duress.

Beyond Statehood: Addressing Deeper Anxieties

Analysts emphasize that Kashmir’s aspirations extend beyond merely securing statehood. The region faces pervasive anxieties, internalized responses to exclusion, and a lack of platforms for expressing dissent. Guarantees of dignity, protection from harm, and the restoration of democratic platforms are crucial for rebuilding collective hope.

Attacks on Kashmiris and Impunity

A spate of attacks on Kashmiris across India, including the January 2026 targeting of 17-year-old Tabish Ahmed in Uttarakhand, highlights a broader assault on the psyche of the Kashmiri population. The state’s response to these attacks often generates impunity. The March 11, 2026 assassination attempt on former Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah underscored the scale of the problem.

Lieutenant Governor’s Role and Criticisms

While Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha’s administration has overseen improvements in transportation networks and facilitated business growth, he has also faced criticism for attempting to usurp the elected government’s prerogatives. Instances of transferring officials without consulting the chief minister and terminating government employees over alleged terrorism-related charges have raised concerns about self-censorship.

Navigating a Complex Path Forward

Abdullah has adopted a pragmatic approach, focusing on areas of agreement with New Delhi, recognizing the challenges of confronting a central government increasingly characterized as an “electoral autocracy.” However, some within his party criticize this pragmatism as a lack of resolve. Experts suggest that a unified approach, leveraging the strengths of different political actors, is essential, but warn against the risks of both inaction and ineffective confrontation.