Arteev Sharma
Jammu: The process to finalise a new constitutional framework for Ladakh suffered another setback on Thursday, with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Ladakh representatives failing to reach out a “consensus on gaps” emerged over the Centre’s first draft proposal, particularly on the powers of the proposed elected body and the nature of constitutional safeguards for the Union Territory.
The Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), spearheading the movement for constitutional safeguards and full-fledged statehood for the Union Territory of Ladakh, have described the draft as “unsatisfactory and unacceptable”, and announced that they would not allow any dilution in their stand.
After the meeting, it was decided that next round of sub-committee talks would be held on October 22 in New Delhi.
“There was no breakthrough in the meeting as clear gaps remain between the draft submitted by the MHA and our proposal based on the in-principle understanding reached with us during the May 22 meeting. The meeting remained inconclusive, if not a failure,” LAB chairman Chering Dorjay Lakrook told The News Now.
He said they also responded to seven queries raised by the MHA but maintained that the MHA’s draft did not reflect the understanding reached during the previous meeting held on May 22 this year.
Lakrook informed that discussions focused on finalising the modalities of the proposed Union Territory-level body, which the Ladakh representatives want to be vested with legislative, executive and financial powers.
The veteran Buddhist leader identified the assessment of the Chief Secretary’s Annual Performance Report (APR) as one of the key points of disagreement. “It was agreed that the APR of the Chief Secretary would be assessed by the proposed Chief Minister of the elected UT body, but the MHA had a different proposal,” he said.
The LAB chairman also said there were differences over the proposed constitutional safeguards under Article 371(K), which, according to him, differed from the arrangements available in northeastern states. “We stand by our main demands for an elected legislature and Article 371(K). We will not allow any dilution of these demands. We hope the commitments made by the MHA during previous meetings, particularly on May 22, will be fulfilled,” Lakrook said.
A senior leader of KDA, who declined to be named, described the MHA’s draft proposal as “unsatisfactory and unacceptable”.
The leader said the KDA expected to receive a soft copy of the proposal on Friday and would study it before submitting its response by October 18. “The powers of the proposed elected legislature continue to be the main point of disagreement between the two sides”, he said.
Pertinently, the last meeting of Sub-Committee that took place in New Delhi on September 9, though remained inconclusive, had reportedly agreed that members of the UT-level body would be directly elected by the people, rather than being chosen by representatives of the seven newly notified Autonomous Hill Development Councils.
The Ladakh stakeholders were also informed that subjects including land, culture, heritage, forests, environment and natural resources would fall under the proposed elected body under Article 240. The LAB and KDA had reached an in-principle understanding with the Centre during the May 22 meeting in New Delhi on restoring a democratic framework in Ladakh and providing constitutional safeguards broadly on the lines of Articles 371A, 371F and 371G.
Sources said the MHA has so far not finalised several key aspects, including the name of the proposed body, total number of seats, precise distribution of powers, its institutional structure and constitutional validity.
The LAB and the KDA have been jointly leading the movement for statehood and inclusion of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. The proposed constitutional safeguards and an elected legislature remain central to their demands.
