LEH: LAHDC Kargil Councillor Stanzin Lakpa has expressed disappointment over the reported omission of the proposal to establish Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) in all seven districts of Ladakh from the agenda of the latest dialogue between the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the joint leadership of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA).
Addressing a press conference, Lakpa welcomed the progress made during the July 3 meeting between the MHA panel and representatives of LAB and KDA, but questioned why a proposal that was, according to him, accepted “in principle” during the May 22 meeting in New Delhi was no longer part of the discussions.
Lakpa congratulated the Union Territory administration, the Government of India, Ladakh’s political leadership and the people of Ladakh for the positive developments in the ongoing dialogue process. However, he said he was compelled to raise concerns over what he described as a reversal of an earlier consensus on strengthening grassroots governance.
According to Lakpa, the May 22 meeting had reached an in-principle agreement on providing constitutional safeguards for Ladakh under Article 371, besides considering the creation of Autonomous District Councils for all seven districts of the Union Territory. He claimed that the proposal had been placed by the Government of India and accepted in principle by all stakeholders during the discussions.
He argued that the proposal would empower people across Ladakh, including those living in remote border regions such as Changthang, Nubra, Zanskar, Drass and Sham, by decentralising administrative powers.
Questioning the decision to exclude the issue from the latest meeting, Lakpa said changing positions after agreements reached at high-level meetings with the Union Home Ministry raises doubts about the consistency of the dialogue process. “If issues agreed upon in principle are later dropped, what assurance is there that decisions taken in future meetings will also remain unchanged?” he asked, adding that such an approach could weaken public confidence in the ongoing negotiations.
Lakpa maintained that decentralisation of power through Autonomous District Councils would serve both Ladakh’s interests and the country’s strategic interests, given the Union Territory’s sensitive border location. He said empowering local populations in frontier regions would strengthen governance and national security rather than weaken it.
He also cautioned against allowing political disagreements among different stakeholders to determine the future of governance reforms. Referring to the discussions on granting Ladakh a legislature, Lakpa said issues such as representation and distribution of seats should be addressed transparently to avoid future disputes between Leh and Kargil.
Appealing to all participants in the dialogue process, Lakpa urged them to revisit the minutes of the July 3 meeting and restore the proposal for Autonomous District Councils to the agenda before the next round of talks with the Centre.
He warned that if the issue continues to be ignored, demands for decentralised governance are likely to emerge from various parts of Ladakh, as people in different regions seek greater local empowerment and equitable administrative representation.
