In the first ever political activity in the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, since the abrogation of Article 370 and demotion of the state into Union Territory, electorates in Kashmir have given a clear message to New Delhi by rejecting lotus (election symbol of BJP) and extending support to the People’s Alliance for Gupkar Declaration (PAGD) and its mandate seeking restoration of Article 370 in the recently concluded District Development Council (DDC) polls. The PAGD has projected its victory as a resounding rejection of all that the Centre has done in J&K over the last 18-months, and as unambiguous support for its demand that special status and statehood be restored in J&K. Even though these elections were for a local body, both the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) and the PAGD, whose constituents include the National Conference (NC), the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), the J&K People’s Conference, plus the CPI (M), among others, turned it into a sort of referendum on the decisions taken 18 months ago on 5th August 2019 by abrogating Article 370 and splitting the State into two union territories-J&K and Ladakh. Both the Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah were the architects of creating the two UTs. Both these leaders presumed that the people of J&K would learn from their experiences of the past 18 months, and would express themselves by reconciling to the changed situation. However, the solidarity showed by the people of Jammu and Kashmir towards the PAGD was more about hatred for the policies of the BJP. In the past couple of years, since BJP allied with regional party PDP, the political discourse of J&K remained extremely polarized on religious as well as regional grounds. Unlike panchayat elections which was a cakewalk for the BJP due to boycott by the regional parties in protest against snatching of their identity in the shape of separate constitution and flag, besides special status, the saffron party was expecting a same response for the District Development Council (DDC), but to their utter disappointment, the regional parties instead of boycotting the polls decided to unite to fight BJP. The decision of the regional parties to unite bore fruit for Dr Farooq Abdullah led GAPD, which made a big victory in the first elections held in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019. Of the 280 seats, results of 278 were declared and the Gupkar alliance won 110 seats, while the BJP emerged as the single largest party by getting 75 seats after securing the largest vote share in the union territory. The Independent candidates have won 50, Congress 26, Apni Party 12, PDF, and the National Panthers Party two each and the BSP one. The results of two constituencies – one each in Bandipora and Kupwara districts of north Kashmir – were kept in abeyance till further orders, following some discrepancies about candidates’ eligibility. The Gupkar Alliance won nine out of ten in Kashmir division, while BJP bagged six out of ten in Jammu region, there is no clear-cut majority in five DDCs, where independent candidates will play the role of king-makers. The Union Home Minister Amit Shah lashed out at these democratic leaders by calling them “Gupkar Gang” who act at the tunes set by Pakistan. Calling them actors working on behalf of Pakistan did not stick and the way the administration waved names of senior PAGD leaders including Farooq Abdullah as Roshni Act beneficiaries ahead of the elections, the ED’s actions against Farooq Abdullah, the arrest of PDP’s star mobilize youth leader Waheed Para (who was himself a candidate and won the election) put in jail, while several other candidates of PAGD were detained under the pretext of “for their own security”, thus effectively ensuring they should not campaign, were all too apparent, orchestrated attempts by the Centre to control the election outcome. Moreover, the performance of BJP in Kashmir is so poor despite roping in many star campaigners, including Smriti Irani, Shahnawaz Hussain, Muhtar Abbas Naqvi, Dr. Jitendra Singh, Anurag Thakur (all-Union ministers in Modi’s govrnment), among others. To their credit, the Gupkar alliance held firm against the strong-arm tactics. These results in no way soothe BJP administration or leadership, which has been using strong undemocratic tactics by forcibly containing some of the candidates of PAGD in Srinagar hotels restricting them from campaigning in their respective constituencies under the garb of security to them. The PDP Chief Mehbooba Mufti was forced to stay at home by the security forces posted outside her residence. Human rights violations by the officials continue to be a normal act here. What the J&K Administration has failed to achieve in DDCs during the voting and is now trying to convert it into limited victory by using officials to coerce /compel the candidates who have been elected as independents to support BJP. There are three DCCs in Kashmir where the independents carry the sway as to which party should manage the councils. The real the issue for the country as well as for J&K is the induction of a new administrative power structure in electoral politics i. e. the creation of a new and unique layer of elected representatives for the district councils or assemblies. Should these representatives be called as a class of junior MLAs or a senior councilor or sarpanches? It all depends as to how the elected representative would look at themselves or the UT administration views them. What does this mean not only for the politics of Kashmir, but also for the institutional structure of Indian parliamentary democracy, wherein citizens directly elect representatives to only three tiers of governance provided for in the Constitution — Parliament, legislative assemblies, and the panchayats or Zilla Simitis for administering the villages through Panchayats. Unlike anywhere else in the country, another governance layer — the DDCs — have been directly elected only in J&K. These are not even statutory bodies, having been created by amending the J&K Panchayati Raj Act, 1989 through executive fiat. By electing 14 members each to 20 DDCs, the existing architecture of legislative democracy in J&K has been instantly calligraphed. It is a completely new form of administrative structure brought in J&K. In J&K many veterans consider the DDCs as “mini-district assemblies”, which have no mention in the Constitution of India. Yet the DDCs have been put atop as the third tier of governance in J&K. Now, look at the geography of these DCC constituencies, no matter how large or small a district is in terms of its geography or demography, it has the same number of elected representatives. So, for instance, with a population over 12 lakhs, the Srinagar district has 14 representatives, so does Kishtwar with a population of less than 2.5 lakh. In terms of area, nearly 9,000 sq km of Doda and barely 250 sq km of Ganderbal are at par. Nowhere in the country is there such a wide variation in the per capita representative power. Backed by the democratic authority of having been elected directly by the people, the DDCs, individually and collectively, carry the potential to assert themselves as an institution parallel to the state assembly. The elected 280 semi-MLAs styles in nature representing a short of 20 district assemblies would bind to confront the state assembly to retain their power as local development representatives of the people. Obviously, the local self-governance system which has no constitutional support whatever is the requirement; it appears to have been designed to weaken the state’s legislative system. If one looks at this whole electoral exercise conducted in the name of decentralization in a restless UT of J&K, one reaches the conclusion that for the Centre J&K is an experimental laboratory, where another experiment in the form of DDCs have been introduced. It is difficult to assess how it would function when put into operation vis a vis the J&K assembly, whenever the Union government revives it in the future. The moot question is what and how the J&K politicians may react to this new gambit, may have to think now as if they need autonomy or sovereignty? What would be the DDCs administrative structures’ implications for other states in the country? Since the new system of administration has been brought in J&K, the people from outside J&K are neither speaking against it nor in favour of it. If it suits the leaders at the Centre, it may also replicate it (DDCs system) in all the 718 districts in 30 states as well as Union Territories (UTs) of the country. Because such a system weakens the power of the state assemblies and by default strengthens the Centre. It cuts into the power of local state administration. Don’t feel surprised it could be possible as it synchronized with the idea of one country, one language, one tax system, and one administrative system as well as one election. And the best recent example one can cite is of three agriculture acts imposed on the country without consulting the states, although agriculture is a state subject. The writer is a senior journalist and Indo-Pak peace activist