Topic 1 : What is behind Ladakh’s unrest?
The story so far
Thousands returned to Leh’s streets in sub-zero temperatures earlier this month, demanding full Statehood for Ladakh and inclusion in the Sixth Schedule to safeguard land, culture, language, and environment. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) set a date for the second round of discussions, but the movement, backed by engineer-activist Sonam Wangchuk’s fast unto death proposal, is expected to intensify.
The reason for the protests
- Ladakh has experienced multiple shutdowns, marked by frequent street protests and demonstrations over the past four years after the region was carved out of Jammu and Kashmir as a separate UT, leading to concerns among locals about the loss of identity, resources and bureaucratic overreach.
- Ladakh, which was then one of three divisions of J&K, was established as a UT without a legislature, unlike J&K.
- Ladakh had been represented by four members in the J&K Assembly and two in the Legislative Council before the abrogation.
- The Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils of Leh and Kargil, formed to administer the region, also have limited powers.
A jobs crisis and lack of political representation added to the unrest.
- The apprehensions led to a string of protests in the Muslim-majority Kargil which wanted to remain a part of the erstwhile State and not join the Buddhist-majority Leh.
- Civil society and religious outfits in Leh also felt vulnerable with the reorganisation taking away the protection enshrined under Article 35A.
- Ladakhis say that Ladakh was better off with Article 370 which prevented industries from exploiting their resources.
The wants
- Their main demands include having a full-fledged legislature, constitutional safeguards under the Sixth Schedule, separate Lok Sabha seats for Leh and Kargil districts, and job reservations for locals.
- Activists and leaders of the socio-political bodies are demanding an increase in the number of Lok Sabha seats from one to two (one each for Kargil and Leh) to ensure representation of Ladakhis in Parliament and a full-fledged elected legislature.
- The other demand, for constitutional safeguards has served as a major rallying point, with the LAB and KDA urging the government to grant special status to Ladakh on the lines of Mizoram, Tripura, Sikkim and other northeastern States.
- The Schedule protects tribal populations and provides autonomy to the communities through autonomous development councils.
Way forward
The government should initiate meaningful dialogue with the stakeholders involved in the protests, including representatives from Ladakh's local communities, political leaders, and civil society organizations. This dialogue should aim to understand the underlying grievances, aspirations, and concerns driving the demand for Sixth Schedule status.
Topic 2 : An intervention that will help strengthen legal education
Context
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice recently submitted a significant report on legal education, making several path-breaking recommendations to strengthen the quality of legal education in India.
About and issues
- Since Independence, legal education, unlike medicine and engineering, has not been a top priority for India’s policymakers.
- Things started to change for the better in the 1990s with the advent of the national law universities (NLUs) in India.
- Buoyed by the winds of liberalisation and globalisation, the Indian economy in the 1990s threw up many new opportunities for lawyers, which, in turn, led to bright young students opting to study law right after school.
- Several NLU graduates got placed in high-paying law firm jobs while many others went abroad to study at top universities, with quite a few bagging prestigious scholarships.
- However, the same cannot be said about hundreds of other law schools nationwide that essentially represent a “sea of institutionalized mediocrity”.
- Most of the NLUs too, while successfully attracting excellent students, have failed to emerge as centres of excellence in legal research.
- This is borne by the fact that only two Indian law schools, Jindal Global Law School and National Law School of India University, figure in the QS rankings of the top 250 law schools worldwide.
A new regulator
- Against this backdrop, a key recommendation of the committee is to limit the powers of the Bar Council of India (BCI) to regulate legal education.
- The BCI’s role in regulating legal education that pertains to acquiring basic eligibility to practise in the courts is indispensable.
- However, several other facets of legal education, especially at the post-graduation level, do not pertain to litigation.
- The committee recommends, and rightly so, that regulating these parts of legal education should be entrusted to an independent body called the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER).
- This proposed body will develop qualitative benchmarks to regulate legal education. Eminent legal academicians who deposed before the parliamentary committee batted for the creation of the NCLER.
- In addition to judges and practising lawyers, the NCLER should have eminent law professors with an unimpeachable track record of research and serving legal education.
Bolstering research
- Consequently, India is chiefly the consumer of legal knowledge generated in the West, not its producer. As it barely had a handful are Indian law journals. This shows the abysmally poor level of research in India’s law schools.
- The committee emphasises the need to prioritise and promote research in legal education, which, in turn, will lead to better teaching outcomes and help students develop a critical perspective.
- Bolstering research will also equip India’s law schools to thrive in the globalising world. The committee is cognisant of the effect of globalisation on legal education.
- The parliamentary committee’s suggestions are like a breath of fresh air that may help many law professors keep their chin up.
Conclusion
The parliamentary committee’s intervention is a welcome development, and one expects all stakeholders to work together to improve the quality of legal education in India.