Demands from Leh and Kargil - Ladakh’s Current Status
iasparliament
July 05, 2021
What is the issue?
When Jammu and Kashmir was bifurcated into two Union Territories on August 5, 2019, Ladakh was seen welcoming the reorganisation.
But various demands and concerns have been raised from its two districts, Leh and Kargil, over the last two years.
What is the government’s response?
The government appears to be paying more attention to the concerns now, after two years of bifurcation.
This happens parallel to the Centre’s outreach to the Jammu and Kashmir political leadership.
Reportedly, a committee under Minister of State for Home will seek to address these demands from Ladakh.
If the committee with planned representation from Leh and Kargil is set up, it would enable leaders from both the districts to work out a common negotiating front.
What are the different concerns in Leh and Kargil?
Kargil - Of Ladakh’s two districts, the August 2019 changes were immediately opposed by the people of Kargil.
The people of Kargil see themselves as a minority in Buddhist majority Ladakh.
So, the leaders of the majority Shia population in Kargil demanded that the district should remain part of J&K.
They also demanded that special status be restored.
This was to safeguard the rights of Kargil people over their land and employment opportunities.
Leh - Opposition from Leh came later.
Leh believed that it was being marginalised in the larger state of J&K.
So, a UT for Ladakh had been a long-standing demand in Buddhist majority Leh.
But what Leh leaders did not bargain for was the complete loss of legislative powers.
Earlier, Leh and Kargil each sent four representatives to the J&K legislature.
After the changes, they were down to one legislator - their sole MP, and with all powers vested in the UT bureaucracy.
Unlike the UT of J&K, Ladakh was a UT without an assembly.
So, the Ladakh districts fear that alienation of land, loss of identity, culture, language, and change in demography would follow their political disempowerment.
What about the Hill Development Councils?
Leh and Kargil have separate Autonomous Hill Development Councils (AHDCs).
These were set up under the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils Act, 1997.
The councils are elected.
However, the AHDCs have no legislative powers.
They have executive powers over the allotment, use and occupation of land vested in them by the Centre.
They also have the powers to collect some local taxes, such as parking fees, taxes on shops etc.
But the real powers are now wielded by the UT administration.
Worryingly, the UT administration is seen as even more remote than the erstwhile state government of J&K.
What is the recent demand in this regard?
Various groups in Ladakh are demanding for an autonomous hill council under the Sixth Schedule.
The Sixth Schedule is a provision of Article 224(a) of the Constitution.
It was originally meant for the creation of autonomous tribal regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura.
Notably, hill councils under this provision will have legislative powers.
Evolving demands - There is no progress on Leh’s demand for Sixth Schedule protections.
So, the Leh leadership has now upped its demands asking for a Union Territory with an elected Assembly.
Meanwhile, another delegation demanded full statehood to Ladakh, as well as restoration of special status with Article 35 and 370 of the Constitution.
Other issues include protections for language, culture, land and jobs.
Another long-standing demand is the route between Kargil and Skardu in territory under Pakistan in Gilgit-Baltistan.
