Senior Congress leader and former Union Minister Saif-ud-Din Soz is not a free man despite the Jammu and Kashmir government telling the Supreme Court that he was never under detention. A J&K government spokesman has also tweeted that Soz was not under arrest or detention.
In an exclusive interview to The New Indian Express, Soz talks about Art 370 and restoration of statehood to J&K.
Are you a free man?
I have been under house detention since August 5 last year. The government is telling lies. I am barred from venturing out from my residence.
The government released a video saying you are a free man?
It is a deceit and nothing else. I had gone with the permission of police in the morning to see my ailing sister. I was accompanied by the policemen. The policemen on the instructions of their superiors might have made a video and released it. After I returned to my residence, I tried to move out at around 12.35pm to visit my daughter but was not allowed to venture out. I am under detention. There is no written order and all the instructions are being issued verbally.
Are you considering a legal recourse?
The Supreme Court which accepted the government statement that I am a free man should look into the facts. I am discussing legal issues with my lawyers.
How do you see August 5, 2019 developments when the Centre scrapped J&K’s special status and split the state into two Union Territories?
Kashmiris would never accept abrogation of Article 370. It was the basis of our accession with the Indian Union. The most important condition of the accession was retention of internal autonomy as enshrined in Article 370.
Do you support the restoration of Article 370?
The people of Kashmir want restoration of Article 370 or granting of a substitute for that with constitutional guarantees.
The Centre has introduced the domicile law and now domicile certificates are being issued. How do you see it?
It is a fraud… as it is not done by an elected government. They may run day-to-day administration, but they can’t take decisions of very wider implications. It is not acceptable to us.