The recent call by Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah to organise public protests for the restoration of statehood presents one of the most unexpected moments in the history of Indian democracy. It is expected in a democratic regime that generally citizens protest against governments when they realise their aspirations are not being fulfilled. Contrary to a democratic essence, in Jammu and Kashmir the elected government is preparing to exercise the constitutional right of protest to assert more constitutional power. This reversal of roles compels us to ask a fundamental question: if a government itself must protest to secure the powers necessary to govern, who is actually governing, and who truly represents the people?

The strength of democracy lies not just in conducting elections but in ensuring that elected representatives have the authority to represent their voters. Elections create governments, but governance often requires the institutional capacity to translate public mandates into policy. When this ability is significantly constrained, democracy begins to operate more as a procedural exercise than as a system of actual representation. The demand for restoring statehood is often discussed as a constitutional or political issue. However, it is a social question because it is associated with the relationship between citizens, state and political authority. Ideally, democracy survives only when citizens believe that their elected representatives effectively articulate and protect their interests. Representation is not just about occupying elected office; it is about possessing the authority to make political decisions that reflect the public mandate.

The present........

© Greater Kashmir