How an amendment of the Constitution of India can extend to Jammu and Kashmir?

The amendment of Article 370 in 5 August 2019, the government of India revoked the special constitutional status of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 of the Constitution, and abrogated Article 35A which had allowed it to define who its ‘permanent residents’ are and what rights and privileges are attached to such residency. The former state was bifurcated into the Union Territories of Ladakh (without a legislature) and Jammu-Kashmir (with a legislature). Concurrently, the Indian government imposed a near-total telecommunications lockdown in the region, detained political leaders and dissidents, and enforced Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code to prevent violent unrest. The conditions on the ground remained the same for over a year, with many political leaders remaining in detention, District Development Council (DDC) elections taking place as mere tokens of normalcy, and 4G internet services being restored only as late as February 2021.

There are three main points of contention surrounding the constitutional amendments.

First, should the government have revoked J&K’s special status? Second, was the manner of the changes legally and constitutionally justifiable . Third (and of the most significance to the international community), were the preventative steps taken by the Indian government for the sake of national security justifiable in a democratic country from a humanitarian and political perspective.