J & K REMARKS

Kapidhwaja Pratap Singh's
(Officer of Indian Foreign Service) -

The Constitution of India and the Civil Services Conduct Rules require a bureaucrat to remain apolitical. However, whenever a bureaucrat airs their views, it usually catches more attention as the public expects a bureaucrat to be more aware of the issue in question and to be taking a more considered view than the rank outsiders. It is precisely for this reason, that when Mr. Shah Faesal, J&K cadre IAS officer has spoken out on the issue of the "State maiming its own people" , I feel there is a need for another bureaucrat like me to offer certain counter views.

To begin with, we need to debate as to who are the State's 'own' people? When does a citizen of a State lose their citizenship rights? If we look at the jurisprudence of the Law, it is when the individual begins to act against the interests of the State, that they lose the citizenry rights. Is the State not allowed to defend itself against the people who are fighting against the State's interests. Isn't secession a punishable offence under laws of all modern Nations?

Secondly, all criminal codes of the world provide an individual the right to self defence. The IPC goes to the extent of allowing even killing others for own self defence. Aren't the soldiers who are fighting the so called 'own' people entitled for that right?

Thirdly, there have been some comparisons made between the Jat Riots in Haryana and the current issue. The important distinction that needs to be made is that there was no secession demands made by the Jats unlike the Azadi that has been demanded in this case.

Fourthly, even if we leave aside the brazen interference and involvement of our enemy across the border, what exactly are these 'own' people demanding? Beyond the euphemism of Azadi and political dialogues, aren't they really demanding secession, in reality, driven and motivated by an enemy of India?

It is important for the responsible citizenry of this country to focus on all sides of the debate and to clearly distinguish between genuine demands of its people and the secessionary pangs of a clique that is an outsourced agent of  our enemy.

Though media is rightly accused, at times, of over simplifying and generalising issues, but it is my view that, for a change, the media is not wrong in bringing out the iconoclastic differences between two Kashmiri youth who have chosen two different paths for bringing out change in the valley. I'm sure Mr. Faesal, during his service, would have experienced what the bureaucracy of this country feels for Kashmir. It is the Union of India that offered him equal opportunity for his dreams, as it has to lakhs of Kashmiri youth, and it is expected that a bright and learned IAS officer should have made a much needed distinction between the genuine developmental cries of the Kashmiris and the secessionary demands of a handful of people who are clearly being brain washed by the enemy across the border.