Ladakh was previously part of Jammu and Kashmir. However, on August 5, 2019, it was reorganized into a separate Union Territory. The people of Ladakh now seek inclusion in the Sixth Schedule, which provides for greater autonomy. Let’s examine what the Sixth Schedule entails and why it’s crucial for the people of Ladakh.

Initially, the people of Ladakh welcomed the central government’s decision, anticipating rapid development as a Union Territory. However, their hopes began to fade as they found themselves dependent on the central government for various matters, relying on the Lieutenant Governor and a Member of Parliament as intermediaries. This led to a growing sense of discontent and the commencement of protests to assert their rights.

If Ladakh is included in the Sixth Schedule, it would grant a distinct form of autonomy. Special provisions are outlined in Articles 244(2) and 275(1) of the Constitution. Ladakh had these special rights when it was part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

This special arrangement is still in effect in several northeastern states like Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, and Mizoram. This setup allows them to have their own administration. Implementation enables the creation of autonomous districts to facilitate governance in specific areas. These districts typically consist of 30 members, with four nominated by the Governor and the rest elected by the local populace. Significant decisions within these districts require the approval of the district panchayat. This can only be achieved if the central government grants these rights as per the Constitution.

As a Union Territory, Ladakh lacks elected MLAs. Previously, four MLAs represented Ladakh in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly. This absence of representation is a significant source of public anger. They argue that they lack an effective channel to voice their concerns to the government. The government’s promises have largely remained unfulfilled.

The new system has led to a crisis in government jobs. Ladakh used to benefit from recruitment through the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission. Protesters claim that no gazetted positions have been filled from Ladakh in the past five years, although there have been reports of some non-gazetted appointments. Unemployment has increased in Ladakh, forcing educated individuals to take up small businesses. Due to the small population, sales are negligible, and businesses are forced to close.

If the central government accepts the protesters’ demands, several changes will occur in Ladakh. The demands include full statehood to enable the people to assert their rights through their representatives. They also want Leh and Kargil to be separate parliamentary constituencies. The district council will gain extensive powers, including control over land, water, forests, agriculture, village councils, health, and police. This committee will be able to formulate rules and regulations. These changes will greatly benefit Ladakh, allowing local people to develop their state according to their vision and make decisions.

Ladakhi leaders argue that if Sikkim and Mizoram can be granted statehood, the same should apply to Ladakh. They point out that when Sikkim became a state in 1975, its population was around 200,000 and its area was 7,000 square kilometers. Ladakh has a population of over 300,000 and an area exceeding 60,000 square kilometers. Ladakh is strategically more important than Sikkim.

Abdullah highlighted the advantages of a State assembly, specifically the greater autonomy it provides over crucial issues like public order and police control, which currently fall under central governance in the Union Territory. He reiterated his administration’s commitment to its five-year term and the promises made. National Conference President Farooq Abdullah dismissed reports of the assembly’s dissolution as a prerequisite. BJP leader Ashok Koul urged Abdullah to focus on his current mandate. Legal experts suggest that amending the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, through parliamentary law could be sufficient for reinstating the State Assembly, although the unique context of Jammu and Kashmir adds complexity.