Article 370 Case : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing [Day 9]

Ramakrishnan: Will of the people of J&K is integral to the mode of governance specified in Art 370. A process which has systematically with mal intent erased the will of the people can never legitimately affect Article 370.

Ramakrishnan: Some thought and sensitivity and democratic stirrings are required to think of an agency which could express this will. But one thing is clear- it cannot be any agency of the centre.

Ramakrishnan: Today, after 1957, there is no agency which is equal to Constituent Assembly of J&K.

Ramakrishnan: The recommendation has to emanate from an agency which is equal in mandate and stature.

Ramakrishnan: Even a responsible state government's consent will not suffice for changing the terms of the Article. It has to emanate directly from a constituent assembly. A constituent assembly signifies and exclusive agency, exclusively devoted for representation of J&K.

Ramakrishnan: Function is a duty. Power is a discretion. It's a sui generis power given to a responsible state government. It cannot be taken over under Article 356 which is subservient to Article 370.

Ramakrishnan: I checked. In 70 years, all of five COs have been issued during president's rule or governor's rule. One in 1986 and four extending the term of presidential proclamation in the year between '90-96.

Ramakrishnan: A governor not advised by the council of ministers is not recognised by 370. Therefore, any CO issued during the president's rule is not competent.

Ramakrishnan: Will of people of J&K permeates every part of Article 370. I don't endorse the view that the whole article has come to an end. 370(1) survives.

Ramakrishnan: This shared sovereignty is really a system of checks and balances. Article 370 reflects that- central power and power of the State of J&K.