Court verdict, Article 370
The long-awaited judgment of the Supreme Court, which has now upheld the Centre’s decision to abrogate the provisions of Article 370, being one of the oldest ideological movements of the RSS/BJP, has given legal closure to a decades-long debate.
At the same time, the Court’s vague direction to the Centre for restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible” and to the Election Commission of India to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of J&K by September 30, 2024, is baffling, given the fact that following the verdict, the Home Minister has claimed that since the abrogation of Article 370, “peace and normalcy” have returned to J&K. Article 370 was not an impediment to the development of J&K. A more nuanced approach is required for the restoration of permanent peace in the sensitive border State.
S.K. Choudhury,
Bengaluru
MP’s expulsion
It is a shame that an ethics committee mandated to find out whether a Member of Parliament violated ethics as an MP should traverse into her personal matters (Inside pages, “Ethics panel asked Mahua to explain ‘nature of friendship’ with industrialist”, December 11). This is a violation of her privacy as an individual and can only be seen as an attempt to malign her personally.
The perception that she was targeted for her fiery outbursts against the ruling party, is further strengthened by the eventual suspension.
T. Mohan,
Chennai
While the Editorial (December 11) has spoken about the lack of evidence regarding the alleged corruption by the MP, not a word has been said about the impropriety of the MP sharing her login credentials with someone who is out of the parliamentary system, howsoever close he may be to the MP. The person given access to use such a system is morally and ethically under obligation to keep it confidential.
A. Sundararajan,
Chennai
The case has a message for parliamentarians: handle your activities and interactions with care and do not get embroiled in unnecessary controversies
V.J. Lawrence,
Bengaluru
.png?w=600)
