In May 2020, a deathly silence hung over Jammu and Kashmir. Nine months earlier, the Narendra Modi government had unilaterally abrogated Article 370 of the Constitution that guaranteed a special status for the state. Most of Kashmir’s political leaders were emerging from a humiliating months-long detention imposed on them in the days leading up to August 5, 2019.
That month, a National Conference leader wrote a conciliatory opinion piece in a local newspaper, seeking resumption of “political process” in the Union territory. Immediately, senior National Conference leader Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi went public with his criticism.
“Is that all what you are looking for in this reconciliation?” Ruhullah asked in a post on social media platform X. This was one of the first expressions of dissent from Kashmiri’s mainstream politicians after August 5, 2019, though Ruhullah was still under detention.
Ruhullah’s criticism of the Centre as well as his colleague had come at a time when the political leadership had been stunned into silence by New Delhi’s actions.
Two months later, Ruhullah, a three-time legislator, quit as the National Conference’s chief spokesperson.
Though he did not state any reason, the resignation had come a day after former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister and National Conference Vice-President, Omar Abdullah, had written an opinion piece for The Indian Express stating that his party will continue to oppose the reading down of Article 370 “in the highest court in the land in the form of the legal challenge…”
While resigning, Ruhullah warned his party workers from becoming “collaborators” in accepting the status of Jammu and Kashmir post August 5, 2019.
In a region where speaking out against the Centre has consequences, Ruhullah has not shied away from calling out the Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government. He has also been critical of his party’s meek response to the events of August 5, 2019.
Consequently, Ruhullah has emerged as a new power centre within the National Conference itself. According to a political observer in Srinagar, Ruhullah represents an “alternate voice – the voice of the people within the NC. He’s a force that is keeping even the party on tenterhooks.”
An influential Shia Muslim cleric, 47-year-old Ruhullah is himself a direct victim of militancy in Kashmir. In 2000, his father, Aga Syed Mehdi, a long-time Congress leader, was assassinated by militants. Two years later, Ruhullah contested his first Assembly election from Budgam and won. He remained undefeated in the 2008 and 2014 state elections.
Earlier this year, Ruhullah won the Srinagar parliamentary seat. In his interventions in Parliament, he has raised the summary downsizing of Jammu and Kashmir into a Union territory, calling it a violation like the “disrobing of Draupadi”.
As a National Conference government begins its term, Ruhullah spoke to Scroll on the long-term fight for restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and the space for the new government to address the expectations of the people. Excerpts:
How do you look at the results of the Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir?
The verdict was firstly against the decisions that were taken on August 5, 2019 by the Bharatiya Janata Party. Against the behaviour of the BJP, the handling of the state of Jammu and Kashmir and the onslaught we have witnessed in the last five years.
And it translated in favour of a particular party – the National Conference – which promised to honour or which seemed closer to the sentiment.
But the verdict was completely polarised by region.
I wouldn’t say that all of Jammu voted for the Bharatiya Janata Party. There were more than a couple of constituencies where non-BJP candidates, including from the National Conference, won.
Similarly, in the Pir Panjal region, many constituencies came to NC’s kitty.
The results reflect a predominant sentiment – the dignity and the status that the people of Jammu and Kashmir were promised and guaranteed by the Constitution of India. And this sentiment is present on both sides of the mountains.
There has been a lot of criticism of the National Conference for a delay in bringing a resolution in the Assembly against what was done on August 5, 2019. Many have called it a U-turn.
There are deliberate attempts to confuse and create doubts among people by those who were defeated [in the elections], those political parties who were shown their place. The National Conference had committed in its manifesto that it will bring a resolution against the abrogation of J&K’s special status in the Assembly. And it has. But even before the Assembly was convened, we were accused of betraying people.
The Opposition parties and others have called the language of the National Conference’s resolution on special status “soft” and “meek”. They say it does not condemn what happened on August 5, 2019. How would you like to respond to that?
The resolution talks about the return of constitutional guarantees, which means the status and the rights Jammu and Kashmir had through Articles 370 and 35A. Therefore, there is no ambiguity in it. Those who are opposing it would find an excuse to oppose it, no matter how it was drafted. But the fact remains that this resolution in its intent and purpose is the condemnation of the decisions of August 5, 2019.
There has been a rise in militancy-related incidents in Jammu and Kashmir ever since the government was formed on October 16. Supporters of the Centre’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir have tried to link this to the return of the local elected government. Do you agree with that assessment?
If all of us remember correctly, until very recently, the BJP would boast that there is no militancy in J&K because of their efforts. So if they take the credit, then they have to take the blame for incidents like these as well.
They have a lot of answering to do. How [is it that] immediately after the popular government takes over, the security apparatus, which is still in the hands of the same regime, fails so brazenly? Is it a failure or is it by design? And I can sense a design and there is no harm in questioning that.
Is this on record?
Yes. I am on record. I can sense a design to destabilise the mandate of the people and come up with excuses to not restore statehood as directed by the Supreme Court.
As someone who has spoken strongly against the scrapping of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, what do you think needs to be done by the elected government to get it back?
First, it’s very difficult to make the entire nation understand that Article 370 is not anti-national. Rather, it’s an article of faith in the Constitution. That’s the first barrier we have to break in terms of strategy.
Then, we need to find allies with whom our cause resonates. And there, I don’t see myself, or my party or even the state of Jammu and Kashmir, alone or isolated.
I am quite optimistic about the polity of many parties from the south of India and some parties in east India who believe in a stronger federal set-up, who believe that states should be more powerful than the Centre and that the Union government should enjoy limited powers.
After my first couple of speeches in Parliament, many MPs from Trinamool Congress, DMK [Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam] and other political parties approached me and said we are with you. In them, I saw a will to engage and I told them we will take this conversation forward.
I see an opening for us there.
It’s not only about Jammu and Kashmir. One of the outcomes of a post-Modi India is that states will definitely want to be stronger. They have seen how the Modi regime has disenfranchised states and how the Centre has become all-powerful. And so, there will be many forces who would want to reshape the structure of India.
What I want the NC to do and all of us to do, is to strategise our struggle. First and foremost, we have to keep the cause alive. Then take the cause to the rest of the nation and make them understand.
After that, we have to find allies who believe in the common cause of having stronger states in the overall federal structure. And when those allies are in power, then you can expect something coming back to Jammu and Kashmir.
In effect, you are saying that a new India or a different India is needed for the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status.
I see an opening for the restoration of Article 370 in an India of the future. There will be a course correction after the end of the Modi regime.
So this time can be used to build allies?
Yes. Keep the cause alive and build allies.
Recently, chief minister Omar Abdullah met the senior leadership of the country including Prime Minister Modi. It appeared to be a very cordial meeting – a striking contrast to how the Kashmir leadership has been towards the Centre after August 2019. Can we say that the ice has melted?
If it was me, I would not have gone in this manner [after] what we have felt and have been subjected to by the Centre in the last five years. I would give back what I received. Having said that, if the end result is something that we all espouse, I don’t mind having different approaches.
If the chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir has the responsibility of delivering both on a political as well as an administrative mandate, he has to find ways to facilitate a road for their implementation. I would only be worried if while doing all this, he compromises on our political ideology or commitment. He has not done that.
In a Union territory set-up, can your government deliver on the promises made in the party manifesto?
If you go through the manifesto carefully, the things that do not come under the direct control of the elected government, we have mentioned we will ‘strive for’ and ‘struggle for’. It's not that we have guaranteed something without mentioning that it’s not in our hands. In terms of the bigger fight, we have committed to the struggle.
Let me quote what I have often said in my private conversations. This government represents dissent and struggle. I don’t see the head of this government as a chief minister but a ‘chief struggler’. So, they have a lot of struggle to do.
Going back to the results, not until very long ago, the National Conference represented both the regions of Jammu and Kashmir. Isn’t the party’s evisceration in Jammu a problem?
I agree. The problem came from the fact that we ceded the space to Congress, which is incapable of fighting BJP on the ground.
For the functioning of the state and the coexistence of all shades of opinion in this state, it’s the responsibility of the National Conference to engage in a positive manner and bring back that element of secularism and sense of collective existence in those constituencies.
Was the pre-poll alliance with the Congress then a good idea?
I would still say it was. Because there were many rumours that the National Conference had a discreet arrangement with the BJP.
The Congress has not promised the return of special status for Jammu and Kashmir. So wasn’t the alliance strategy flawed?
When I spelled out a strategy for the future, did I mention Congress? No. I took those forces into account who want a stronger federal structure. And I want to see a day when those parties are in greater numbers in Parliament. And they will be. They can dictate what shape India takes.
I don’t want the Congress to again become as strong as the BJP is today. I would want Congress to be dependent on different forces of India and that is where I see an opening.
I am not hopeless about the Congress either. I can understand their strategy. It’s suicidal for them to speak about Article 370 at the moment. Why should I push them to a suicide? At the same time, if you check their working committee resolution immediately after the scrapping of J&K’s special status, they spoke in favour of the restoration of Article 370. So, it’s there. When the situation is such that they can speak more proactively and comfortably for our cause, I would expect them to stand by their principles.
What are your thoughts on the core issue of Kashmir? Do you think Kashmir’s elected leadership has a role in engaging with Pakistan over Kashmir? Or is it solely New Delhi’s prerogative?
There can be no talks between India and Pakistan without Kashmiris being involved in it. Kashmiris are the actual stakeholders of this issue. There can be no fruitful and result-oriented dialogue between these two countries unless they involve the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
How do you view Engineer Rashid as a politician? Many called his release from prison as part of the BJP’s game plan.
People have taken a call on that question and decided accordingly in the Assembly elections. So I should respect the people’s opinion.
However, I have never called him a BJP proxy or something else. I hope his cases are taken to their logical conclusion and he is released permanently so that he can represent his constituency.
In April, there was a complaint filed with the Jammu and Kashmir police’s crime branch, accusing you of having fudged your date of birth. In your election affidavit, you have said you are 46 years old, which makes your year of birth 1977. However, there are counter-claims that you were born in 1982, the year mentioned in your school records and your passport. It’s being said that this was done in order to allow you to contest your first election in 2002.
What they are saying is that I have two [date of birth] certificates. That's something I have myself admitted. I have gone to the concerned institutions, asking for a correction.
I have contested four elections, for God's sake. My papers have been scrutinised four times by the Election Commission. If there is any foul play, they would have caught me long back.
This is being done by those who have been defeated and rejected by the society, who work for their masters in Delhi, and hope that this would end up with me being in jail. It does not worry me. But yes, it’s an irritation.
