Srinagar, Sep 29: The Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly witnessed fresh uproar on Tuesday as Leader of Opposition (LoP) Sunil Sharma renewed his demand for the removal of Speaker Abdul Rahim Rather, accusing him of allowing an “illegal and unconstitutional” resolution seeking restoration of statehood to be passed despite objections over its wording and procedure.
The confrontation erupted at the outset of the day’s proceedings, with Sharma questioning the Speaker’s decision to allow Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s resolution to be taken up and passed on Monday. The BJP leader argued that objections raised by the Law Department and the government’s own position had cast a shadow over the legality of the proceedings.
“The Speaker should take moral responsibility for allowing the resolution to proceed and step down from the chair,” the LoP said. “The resolution is unconstitutional and illegal as already cleared by the Law Department. It is sub judice, and it can’t be discussed in the House,” Sharma said.
The Speaker, however, asserted his authority to conduct the proceedings, making it clear that he was aware of his powers and the rules governing the functioning of the House. “Don’t teach me, I know my duty,” he said.
The exchange triggered a fresh confrontation between the treasury and opposition benches, with National Conference members raising “Vote Chor” slogans as the dispute over the resolution continued to dominate the proceedings.
The BJP subsequently staged a walkout, protesting against the Speaker’s decision to permit discussion on the resolution, which it has opposed over references to the Assembly’s earlier resolutions on autonomy and special status.
The statehood resolution, moved by Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, passed by the House on Monday, calls upon the Government of India for the “immediate and urgent restoration of full statehood” to Jammu and Kashmir. It also refers to resolutions passed by the Assembly on June 26, 2000, and November 6, 2024.
The reference to the 2000 autonomy resolution has been the principal point of contention, with the BJP maintaining that restoration of statehood should not be linked to demands concerning autonomy or the pre-August 5, 2019 constitutional position.
Sharma has repeatedly maintained that the BJP supports the restoration of full statehood but objects to the language and references incorporated into the resolution. The party has argued that the inclusion of the earlier resolutions makes the text unacceptable to it.
The controversy has also brought the Speaker’s position under scrutiny, with the BJP having moved a notice seeking Rather’s removal. BJP MLA R S Pathania had raised the matter in the House on Monday, questioning how the Speaker could continue in the chair while a motion seeking his removal was pending.
Rather had maintained that the notice would have to be dealt with under the prescribed Assembly procedure and could not be taken up immediately. He referred to the requirement for written notice and the prescribed period before such a motion could be included in the House’s business.
The latest confrontation underscores the widening political divide over the statehood resolution, with the National Conference-led government pressing for the restoration of full statehood and the BJP insisting that the demand should remain separate from the question of autonomy and the erstwhile special constitutional status.
With the autumn session scheduled to conclude on September 30, the resolution and the dispute over the Speaker’s handling of the House have emerged as major flashpoints between the ruling alliance and the principal Opposition party.
