Advisor appointment rekindles debate on governance in Jammu & Kashmir

By Raqif Makhdoomi* 

The government in Jammu and Kashmir has completed approximately one and a half years in office. During the initial phase of its tenure, public expectations were shaped by commitments made during the election campaign. In particular, the Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, stated at a press conference held at the Sher-i-Kashmir International Conference Centre (SKICC) that major promises would be addressed within the first six months of governance. As the government has now crossed two such six-month periods, public discourse continues to assess the extent to which these commitments have been met.

Soon after the National Conference received a significant electoral mandate, an interview given by the Chief Minister attracted widespread attention. In the interview, he stated that Article 370 could not be restored by those from whom it had been removed. The statement prompted extensive public debate and criticism. Subsequently, the party clarified that the Chief Minister intended to convey that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) would not support the restoration, rather than indicating an abandonment of efforts on the issue. Despite this clarification, the episode contributed to uncertainty regarding the government’s approach to its stated promises.

One of the key expectations among sections of the public has been the provision of 200 units of free electricity. During the election campaign, the Chief Minister had expressed opposition to the installation of smart meters. After assuming office, the government stated that the provision of free electricity units would require the installation of smart meters. This shift in position led to public discussion and concern.

Under the current policy framework, the Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) category has been extended certain electricity-related benefits, subject to the installation of solar power systems. The cost of installing such systems is reported to be substantial, which has raised concerns among economically weaker sections. Other consumer categories continue to await clarity regarding the implementation of the proposed 200 units of free electricity. During the campaign, party representatives had stated that the benefit would apply across categories. As of now, the timeline and scope of this commitment remain under discussion.

Among the major promises made during the election campaign were:

Restoration of Article 370

Restoration of statehood

Release of political prisoners

It was stated during the campaign that the first resolution introduced in the Legislative Assembly would pertain to Article 370. When the initial business of the House was announced, no such resolution was listed. Following public response, a resolution was later introduced referring to “special status,” without explicit mention of Article 370. The distinction between the two terms has been a subject of political and legal debate.

Regarding statehood, a resolution was reportedly passed in a cabinet meeting and submitted to the Union Home Minister by the Chief Minister. The text of this resolution has not yet been made public. On the issue of political prisoners, no formal resolution has been placed in the public domain.

Another area of public concern has been the rationalisation of reservation policies. The Member of Parliament from Srinagar led a protest outside the Chief Minister’s residence, highlighting differences within the political leadership on this issue. A committee constituted to examine reservation-related matters was asked to submit its report within six months. More than a year has since elapsed, and the report has not been released publicly.

In addition, the repeated cancellation of recruitment and competitive examinations has been a recurring issue. Candidates incur expenses related to registration and travel, and exam cancellations have caused frustration among students and job aspirants. This has contributed to broader concerns regarding employment opportunities and administrative efficiency.

In this context, the recent approval of an Advisor by the Lieutenant Governor has generated public debate. As per available information, the Advisor is entitled to a government vehicle, official accommodation, a monthly salary of approximately ₹80,000, and protocol equivalent to that of a cabinet minister. The appointment has coincided with ongoing discussions on unemployment, daily wage workers’ demands, and delays in policy implementation.

While the Chief Minister has the administrative authority to appoint staff for effective governance, the timing and nature of such appointments have become a subject of public scrutiny. Critics argue that, given prevailing economic and employment challenges, such decisions require careful consideration to maintain public confidence.

---

 *Law student and a human rights activist