Taking a major step, the Umar Abdullah government of Jammu and Kashmir issued an order to take control of the management committees of 215 such schools, which were found to be associated with the banned organization Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) and its associate body Falah-e-Aam Trust (FAT). Intelligence agencies had clarified that the validity of the management committees of these schools has ended and negative reports have also come on them. The state government argued that it is necessary to take this step to save the educational future of students and ensure the quality of education.
But political dispute arose as soon as the order was issued. Opposition parties called it “political excesses” and “slavery”. Sajjad Lone even said that the government has been a partner of such steps which are imposed on Kashmiris. At the same time, on behalf of PDP, Iltija Mufti called it an old policy of National Conference, which has always been targeted to Jamaat-e-Islami.
On deepening the controversy, Education Minister Sakina Ittu issued a statement and tried to make himself different from the departmental order. He said that the government has not done the school “takeover”, but has arranged an interim viewing for only three months until the new management committees are verified by the CID. He said that neither the staff has changed, nor the building nor the students will have any effect. This is not a “takeover” but a temporary management.
But this cleaning does not match the voice of the government order and the notification issued by the Secretary of the Department of Education. This revealed that the government is holding back from its own decision under pressure. The important question here arises whether the criticism of local political parties and the possible vote-bank pressure forced the government to withdraw from its decision? If these schools have been linked to the banned organization in the report of intelligence agencies, then why is he hesitant to take drastic steps on it?
On the other hand, the BJP supported the original order of the government and said that more than 50 thousand students would be saved from separatist ideology. At the same time, the party also questioned the “hesitation” of the Education Minister. This double stance makes it clear that the state government is involved in politically balanced, on the one hand there is pressure of anti-terrorism policy, on the other hand there is a worry of preventing local dissatisfaction from provoking.
The situation clarifies that the Jammu and Kashmir government is still uncomfortable to balance between political pressure and security requirements. If seen in the context of terrorism and separatism, any “reversal” can give a message that the government withdraws from taking concrete decisions. This can not only affect the morale of the security agencies, but can also indicate radical elements that they can affect policies by creating pressure.
Let us tell you that Jamaat-e-Islami has been banned since 2019 and this organization is directly related to separatist ideology. In such a situation, the step of monitoring and improvement on the schools affiliated to it is logical. But the way the state government first gave rigorous order and then it was seen to be soft amid political pressure, it raises a question mark on its policy clarity. This developments show that the politics of Jammu and Kashmir still has a unbalanced mixture of “rigor and flexibility”. This is the place where the question arises is bound to arise whether the state government is not indirectly strengthening terrorism and separatism by bending in front of local political pressure?