Delimitation double standards: One rule for J&K, another for South India

While South Indian states could lose LS seats on the population principle, the reverse is happening in J&K

For some years now, many South Indian states have been flagging the issue of distribution of the central pool of tax revenue in the Finance Commission. The grounds for concern have been that the southern states collect more taxes and have brought down their populations, but the larger shares of revenue go to the poorer states with bigger and expanding populations. In other words, the South Indian states have been arguing that they are "penalised" for controlling the pace of population growth.

To extend this argument a step further, it means that tax income collected from better-performing states is used to underwrite policies and schemes in poorly performing states such as Uttar Pradesh. Currently, schemes and infrastructure projects are being inaugurated at a frenzied pace in election-bound Uttar Pradesh, all on public money before the Election Commission notification for the state polls is announced. By extension, therefore, tax-paying residents of south India have every right to be concerned about public spending in Varanasi or Gorakhpur.

Read | J&K Delimitation Commission's draft proposal explained

This issue of distribution of taxes cannot be delinked from delimitation, the act of redrawing boundaries and increasing the number of seats in state assemblies and the Lok Sabha to reflect the changes in population. The issue is a ticking time bomb since that can potentially recast the federation of India as we know it. Currently, there is a freeze on this exercise till 2026. But in the future, there is a clear and present danger confronting states in the south that they would be outnumbered to a larger extent than they currently are. Should the BJP win the 2024 Lok Sabha elections as well, it would certainly be in the party's interest to see that the number of seats in Hindi belt states, where the party has its bases, should increase while those in the south could potentially decrease.

After all, the pet project of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Central Vista in New Delhi, aims to build a Parliament building that will accommodate many more members both in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. In an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the CPWD (Central Public Works Department) said that the new Lok Sabha chamber could accommodate 876 members and 1224 during joint sessions as it would be three times the size of the current chamber in Parliament. In the same affidavit filed in the context of suits against the Central Vista project, the CPWD stated that the current strength of the Lok Sabha has remained at 545 as per the delimitation carried out after the 1971 Census, but "it is likely to increase substantially as the freeze on the total number of seats is only till 2026."

Imagine, therefore, the future: more seats for Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan and less for performing states such as Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Punjab that have done well on population control? Indeed, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has publicly stated that the Modi government might advance the delimitation of Lok Sabha constituencies from the mandated timetable of 2026 if it feels unsure of winning the 2024 elections. Speaking from the perspective of being an MP from the South, he said that the delimitation is a very real threat because "as a percentage of Parliament in terms of total seats we will no longer form an effective block from the southern states."

Read | J&K delimitation may not give govt's policy legitimacy

It is in this backdrop that the controversial delimitation for Jammu & Kashmir can also be viewed. Here the reverse is happening, and the critique by Kashmiri stakeholders is that the principle of population has been ignored in the draft proposal of the Delimitation Commission. The Commission has proposed adding six seats to Jammu's tally and one to Kashmir's. The charge by political parties in the Valley is that the idea is to "increase the Hindu footprint through enhancing the numbers of Jammu." Former chief minister Omar Abdullah has said the Commission is promoting the political agenda of the BJP. He quotes the 2011 Census to state that the share of the population is 56.2 per cent in the Kashmir division and 43.8 per cent in Jammu. He then elaborates on the current seat share ratio: 55.4 per cent for Kashmir and 44.6 per cent for Jammu and says it would fall to 52.2 per cent in Kashmir and 47.8 per cent in Jammu if the delimitation recommendations made public last week were to be accepted. They have now been rejected by politicians from the Valley who say that the idea behind the proposal is also to end the possibility of a Kashmiri Muslim chief minister in the future.

Frankly, the BJP does not care about hearts and minds in the Valley as Muslim majority Kashmir is viewed through the prism of ideology. The Jammu & Kashmir delimitation follows a different set of rules and has been necessitated by the entire structure of special status being taken away on August 5, 2019, and the state being downgraded into a union territory. It's also clear that the nation's pre-eminent ruling party places political expediency and ideological underpinnings over propriety and precedent. The Valley remains utterly alienated, but the BJP does not really care, although it does give importance to holding its bases in Jammu.

It is noteworthy that the principle of population has been ignored in the draft proposal for Jammu & Kashmir, but when it comes to the national delimitation exercise, this is precisely the argument the BJP ecosystem would use to increase seats from states where the party has a presence. For when it comes to public policy, the BJP appears to have decided that heads they win and tails the Opposition loses. But this over-centralised approach of the BJP can, in the long run, trigger strong anti-New Delhi emotions in some southern states and lead to Balkanisation of the mind in parts outside Kashmir.

(Saba Naqvi is a journalist and an author)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.