“Article 370 a mechanism through which the people of J&K could have chosen to integrate with India,” advocate Zafar Shah on Day 5Gursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 10, 2023
“Constitutions of India and J&K speak to each other through the tradition of Article 370,” Gopal Subramanium on Day 4 of hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 9, 2023
“Though the Constitution is a political document, its provisions cannot be manipulated for political ends,” argues Kapil Sibal of Day 3 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 8, 2023
“Tomorrow if the Parliament says it is the Constituent Assembly, can it do away with the basic structure of the Indian Constitution?” ask petitioners on Day 2 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 3, 2023
“Without arrangements of autonomy, a continent-sized land of diversity like India would have collapsed,” Rajeev Dhavan on Day 6 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 16, 2023
After 70 years of concurrence and consultation, why retain the empty shell of Article 370? Rakesh Dwivedi on Day 14 of the hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·September 1, 2023
Article 370 powers perished after the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution was adopted in 1957, advocate Dinesh Dwivedi on Day 8 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 22, 2023
Article 370 was a “right loss”, through which people of J&K gained a lot, Tushar Mehta on Day 11 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 28, 2023
Article 370 was temporary only from the perspective of J&K, not India, Dushyant Dave on Day 7 of Article 370 hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 17, 2023
Article 370(3) was a fail-safe in case Article 370(1) did not function as intended for integration of J&K with India, Harish Salve on Day 13 of hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·September 1, 2023
De-operationalisation of Article 370 faces steep constitutional barriersMohammad Wasim·August 3, 2023
Dramatic start to both sessions of Day 15 as lead petitioner Mohd. Akbar Lone asked to prove his allegiance to IndiaArif Ayaz Parrey·September 4, 2023
Five-judge Supreme Court Bench to decide on petition challenging the revocation of special status of J&KThe Leaflet·July 4, 2023
If there were no protests in Kashmir post-Article 370, it means right people had been put under arrest, Tushar Mehta jokes on Day 13 of hearingsGursimran Kaur Bakshi·August 31, 2023
In Re Article 370 judgment: Supreme Court ratifies one vidhan, pradhan and nishanGursimran Kaur Bakshi·December 11, 2023
In Re Article 370 judgment: The challenge and what is at stakeArif Ayaz Parrey and Gursimran Kaur Bakshi·December 10, 2023
In re Article 370: Judgment reserved on the grand constitutional battleMohan V Katarki·September 5, 2023
Is appearing in a court of law against state interest? It might be if you are a Kashmiri, as petitioner-in-person Zahoor Ahmad Bhat found outGursimran Kaur Bakshi·September 3, 2023