Article 370 and constitutionality of CO 272, 273
- August 30, 2023
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
No Comments
Article 370 and constitutionality of CO 272, 273
Subject :Polity
Section: Federalism
Context: The Supreme Court has heard the arguments challenging the abrogation of Article 370.
More about the news:
- CO 272 was issued on August 5, 2019 to amend Article 367 of the Indian Constitution. This amendment changed the reference from the “Constituent Assembly” to the “Legislative Assembly” in Article 370(3), which played a pivotal role in the subsequent steps leading to the abrogation of Article 370.
- CO 273 was issued on August 6, 2019 which operationalized the recommendation made by the Rajya Sabha to abrogate Article 370. This proclamation essentially sealed the abrogation of Article 370 and the reorganization of the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories.
What is the Constitutional Principles involved:
- The core legal arguments in these challenges revolve around the principles of constitutional interpretation, separation of powers, and the procedure for amending or altering the Constitution.
- The petitioners assert that the use of Article 367 to effect substantive changes to Article 370 goes beyond the scope of interpretative powers and violates the constitutional procedure for amending the Constitution.
What Supreme Court had said:
- The Supreme Court has enquired center about the restoration of the statehood of Jammu and Kashmir.
- The Chief Justice had reminded the Centre that the “restoration of democracy is a vital component for our nation”.
What was Article 370 and its features:
- Article 370 was a provision in the Indian Constitution that granted special autonomous status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
- It was intended to provide temporary provisions for the governance of Jammu and Kashmir following its accession to India in 1947.
- The provision allowed Jammu and Kashmir to have its own constitution, a separate flag, and a high degree of autonomy in matters of governance except defense, communication, and foreign affairs were not under the purview of the state and were controlled by the Indian government