The verdict of Indian supreme court went against petitions challenging the validity of Indian parliament’s August 5, 2019 move that stripped IIOJK off its special status. The validation granted by the Indian judiciary to India’s illegal legislation is not the first occasion where the Indian SC has tried to toe the line of a hardline nationalist government under PM Narender Modi. Verdicts on Ayodhya and now Article 370 point out the compromise that the Indian judiciary has made to please its Hindu supremacist masters in Delhi. Though, the verdict speaks volumes about India’s failing democracy, it also highlights the powerlessness of International Law in the face of state sovereignty. Rest assured; the international institutions guised as guardians of law of the nations will be rendered incapable to move against such a blatant violation of UNSC Resolutions.

While referring to the validity of Article 370, the Indian SC in its recent infamous verdict, pointed out its ‘transient’ nature and maintained that any decision taken by the Union in this regard remains ‘unquestionable’. The Indian SC while undermining the principles of federalism has set a dangerous precedent by providing validity to Centre’s control over federating units. Legally, the abrogation of Article 370 was only the prerogative of the constituent assembly of J&K. What the Indian SC green signaled in its verdict was the Union’s utter disregard of its promise that was made at the time of accession of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is now very evident that the Indian Supreme Court has now become party to the grave violations being carried out by India against the people of IIOJK.

The flimsy grounds on which Presidential rule was imposed on J&K and the curtailment of Article 370 through a notorious presidential order before the August 5, 2019 legislations clearly display mala fide intent of the hardline Indian government. Abrogation of Article 370 was not something spontaneous, but came as a result of a well thought out evil strategy carved in Delhi. Apart from federalism and democracy, what Indian SC’s verdict does violate are the clear-cut resolutions passed by the UN Security Council. It is indeed a fact that this verdict is of no legal value and the IIOJK remains an internationally recognized disputed territory. What this verdict achieved is recognition by the ‘Sanghis’ and RSS militants that continue to haunt the nature of Indian democracy. Like the August 5, 2019 move, the Indian SC verdict on Article 370 may also ensure Modi’s winning streak in the upcoming general elections.

Contrary to the 467-page verdict, Kashmir continues to remain on the UNSC agenda as it has been for seven decades. The UNSC resolutions leave the fate of Kashmir to its people through a plebiscite that was guaranteed. There is enough international law in place to declare the supremacy of Indian Constitution over IIOJK void and unacceptable under any circumstances. India cannot free itself from its international obligations under the UN Charter through local laws and court verdicts. IIOJK will not become India’s internal matter even if the oppressors in Delhi repeat it a million times. By trying to alter the demography and political dynamics of Kashmir through illegal legislations and politically influenced court verdicts, India is only fracturing its democratic outlook. The people of Kashmir have been betrayed by the Indian judiciary and they are left with no other options other than violent means to make themselves audible to the international community.

The Indian Supreme Court’s unjust verdict adds further complexities to the question of Kashmir. The ramifications of this staged verdict go beyond the debate of legality, fair or unfair, just or unjust, to validation of grave human rights violations in the valley of Kashmir by the hands of Indian security forces. India’s SC too is no less than a political tool being used by the ruling BJP to uphold its violent fascist agenda. This verdict, as well as the August 5, 2019 move are test cases for the international institutions and the so-called guardians and abiders of International Law. Their failure which is evident shall pave way for Kashmiris to opt for violent means for their just cause.  No number of legislations and extent of brute force can suppress the aspirations of a population that has long sought the right to self-determination. The international community must grapple with the moral imperative to address the Kashmir conflict impartially, acknowledging the rights and aspirations of the people caught in the crossfire of geopolitical interests.