kashmir-anti-reservation-protests-have-sectarian-overtones

National Conference Member of Parliament from Srinagar Ruhullah Mehdi on Monday led a protest against the reservations in the union territory, outside the residence of Chief Minister Omar Abdullah.

Mehdi, a prominent Shia leader coming from an influential religious family, is considered very close to the Chief Minister. 

Interestingly, it was not just Mehdi, but also legislators of the People’s Democratic Party and the Awami Itehad Party, both fierce critics and opponents of the National Conference, who joined the protest.

The leader of the Hurriyat Conference and Mirwaiz Kashmir Maulvi Umar Farooq also supported the anti-reservation protests.

The opponents of the reservation have carefully described the protests as the demand for “rationalisation” of the reservation policy, instead of directly opposing the reservations as such.

The “anti-reservation” sentiment, which is gaining widespread support across Kashmir, is reflective of the resentment of the people there against the erosion of their exclusive dominance over every aspect of life, which the Kashmiris enjoyed prior to the abrogation of Article 370. 

 

In March this year, ahead of the 2024 General Elections, the Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor notified a new reservation policy. Under this policy, the reservation of the Scheduled Tribes (STs) was doubled from 10 to 20 per cent. The STs were subdivided into two categories, ST-1 and ST-2.

 

While Gujjars and Bakarwals (the nomad community) were included in the ST category, another socially and economically backward community of the ‘Paharis’, who lived in the hills, had been completely ignored.

 

All the benefits of the reservations were pocketed by the Gujjar and Bakerwal communities only. 

 

Although being more backward than the Gujjars and the Bakkerwals, the ‘Paharis’ could not get the benefit of reservations, since by caste they neither belonged to the Gujjar nor the Bakkerwal community. 

 

The BJP government addressed the issue of their backwardness, by providing them with ten per cent reservations. This is being opposed by the Kashmiri people, since it benefits mostly the non-Kashmiris, those living in the districts of Rajouri, Poonch, Padar area of Kishtwar district and some parts of Kupwara district in Kashmir region. 

 

Since there is no reservation based on religion, and since there is no caste system prevailing among the Muslim community, no doubt in theory only, no Kashmiri Muslim is entitled to reservation by caste.

 

However, Muslims, as well as non-Muslims from upper castes, do get the benefit of reservation under various categories like those belonging to the ‘Reserved Backward Areas’ (RBA) and those living along the Line of Actual Control or the International Border. 

 

The anti-reservation protestors are also wrong on account of suggesting that the current reservation policy in JK goes against the Supreme Court’s “fifty per cent” ceiling. Under the current policy, while STs have been provided a 20 per cent reservation, there is a 10 per cent reservation for the RBA, 8 per cent for the SCs and 8 per cent for the OBCs and 4 per cent for those living near the LAC or the International Border. 

 

Another 10 per cent reserved for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) falls outside the 50 per cent purview across the country. 

 

What is paining the protestors from the Kashmir region is that so far, when the reservations were limited, they would pocket all the jobs and positions in professional institutions like the medical and engineering colleges.

 

Since most of the facilities were restricted to the Kashmir valley, naturally the students from here would get an advantage over others. Once the new reservation policy was introduced, the benefits were distributed and equitably divided and distributed.

 

This is yet another manifestation of the “feeling of entitlement” that the elite Kashmiris have always had, whether in politics, business, education or government jobs. The protests are being orchestrated only by those people, who have so far, enjoyed all the perks, privileges and benefits without any challenge or competition from anyone else.

 

Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, has little choice, even if he may himself also be wanting the change in the new reservation policy. But he cannot afford to be seen taking any sides. He tried to explain his position, saying he had constituted a cabinet sub-committee for the purpose and also the matter had been challenged in the Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court. 

 

“I understand the emotions surrounding the reservation issue. JKNC had committed to examining all aspects of it in our manifesto released before the assembly elections. It is as a continuation of this commitment that a cabinet sub-committee was constituted to move towards fulfilling this promise.

 

That sub-committee was only recently notified & is in the process of starting its work by engaging with all stakeholders. In the meantime, the reservation policy has also been challenged in the Hon’ble High Court of JK&L. We will, of course, be bound by any judgement when the final legal options have been exhausted”, he wrote on ‘X’. He also met a delegation of protestors at his residence.  

 

In March this year, the Jammu and Kashmir administration approved a 10 per cent reservation for the Paharis who had been included in the category of Scheduled Tribes. Besides, 15 new castes were added to the ‘Other Backward Classes’ in the Union Territory.