‘No Assessment Made' on Impact of Pahalgam Attack on Locals Dependent on Tourism: Govt
New Delhi: The Union tourism ministry has not assessed the economic impact of the Pahalgam terror attack on locals dependent on the tourism industry, minister Gajendra Shekhawat said in parliament.
In an unstarred question, Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi asked whether the government is aware of the decline in tourist visits and the subsequent losses suffered in Jammu and Kashmir following the terrorist attack, which he noted occurred during peak tourist season.
To this, Shekhawat on Monday (July 28) tabled the number of domestic and foreign tourists the Jammu and Kashmir tourism department recorded in the Union territory from 2020 to 2024 as well as between January and June this year.
Asked if the government had prepared an assessment on the attack's 'economic impact on local tourism-dependent stakeholders', Shekhawat answered in the negative.
'No such assessment has been made by the Ministry of Tourism on economic impact on local tourism-dependent stakeholders in Jammu and Kashmir,' he wrote.
Owaisi also asked for details of specific measures the government has taken to 'restore tourist confidence and promote tourism in the region' following the April 22 attack.
While Shekhawat listed various official tourism-related initiatives applying across the country, including to Jammu and Kashmir, he did not characterise any steps as having been undertaken specifically in light of the terrorist attack.
Terrorists singled out and killed 25 tourists – one of them a Nepali national – in the Baisaran meadow near south Kashmir's Pahalgam on April 22, sparking an exodus of tourists from the resort town during peak visiting season. They also killed a local man who offered pony rides to tourists.
India blamed Pakistan for the attack and launched its 'Operation Sindoor' against nine sites identified as terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan as well as Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir on May 7, sparking a four-day-long military conflict that ended with a ceasefire and numerous casualties on both sides.
According to the data tabled by Shekhawat, 96,12,234 tourists – 95,92,664 of them from India and 19,570 from abroad – visited Jammu and Kashmir in the first six months of this year. In all of the previous year 2,35,90,081 tourists visited the Union territory.
Data obtained via RTI has also suggested that only 10% of the purported tourist footfall in the territory since Article 370 was read down in 2019 went to the Kashmir valley.
The activist who obtained the data has however claimed that the number of tourists going to the valley may have been inflated by poor methodology.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
4 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Ajit Pawar asks Maharashtra police to curb vigilantes from checking livestock vehicles
Taking note of law and order issues created by 'private individuals' over the transportation of legally allowed animals, Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister and NCP chief Ajit Pawar has asked the police top brass to direct district police heads to prevent such persons from inspecting vehicles transporting livestock. Pawar's instruction followed a meeting between him and a delegation of the Qureshi community Wednesday, where state Director General of Police Rashmi Shukla and Mumbai Police Commissioner Deven Bharti, among other officials, were present. 'The Qureshi community is traditionally associated with the meat trade and is a part of Maharashtra's agriculture-based economy. Therefore, no injustice will be allowed to be done to the traders of this community and the farmers who transport animals,' Pawar said at the meeting as per an official statement from the Deputy CM's office. In a memorandum of demands submitted to Pawar, the Qureshi community delegation demanded a ban on illegal gau rakshaks (cow vigilantes), protection for transporting legally allowed animals, withdrawal of false cases, and a reduction in restrictions on transport licences. The delegation, while raising the issue of 'harassment' of animal traders by illegal gau rakshaks, in a letter to Pawar, said, 'The violent acts against the traders from Qureshi community and farmers who transport legally allowed animals has led to many losing their lives. The community is forced to call for a strike… This will affect the farmers as well due to unavailability of buyers. Following the 2015 ban on cow slaughter, the transport is already limited. Now, the ongoing actions will affect the legal transport of animals such as buffaloes as well.' The delegation's demand was to 'not allow private individuals to check vehicles', said NCP MLA Sana Shaikh, who was present at the meeting. Along with her, NCP MLC Sanjay Khodke said a number of 'anti-social elements' have started harassing genuine animal transporters. 'As per the law, only police should inspect the vehicles. Despite this clarity, the menace is growing and it needs to be tackled,' Khodke said. According to sources present in the Wednesday meeting, Pawar directed DGP Shukla to issue a circular across all districts. 'The circular will ask police authorities to ensure that no private individual will have any right to check the vehicles transporting animals,' said an official present at the meeting. Despite attempts to contact DGP Shukla, she was not available for comment. During the meeting, sources said, Pawar spoke to Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari over the phone and informed him about the difficulties faced while transporting animals. He requested Gadkari to discuss the issue with the Qureshi delegation and take a decision on changes in the law related to the transportation of animals.
Scroll.in
6 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Petition alleges Section 152 of BNS reintroduces sedition law, SC seeks Centre's reply
The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Union government to respond to a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Live Law reported. Section 152 of the criminal law pertains to acts that endanger India's sovereignty, unity and integrity. It criminalises a wide spectrum of expressive conduct, including those who 'purposely or knowingly' use words to 'excite or attempt to excite' secession, rebellion or subversive activities. The petition claimed that the provision effectively reintroduces the colonial-era sedition law. A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria issued notice on the petition filed by SG Vombatkere, a retired major general in the Indian Army, and tagged it with another pending matter challenging the same provision. In his petition, Vombatkere said that the court had in May 2022 ordered proceedings and criminal prosecutions for sedition under Section 124A of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code to be kept in abeyance, The Hindu reported. However, Section 124A was slipped in again into the law in the guise of Section 152 when the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita replaced the Indian Penal Code in July 2024, the petitioner argued. 'The provision, in effect, reintroduces the colonial sedition law previously codified as Section 124A of the IPC, 1860, under a new nomenclature,' the newspaper quoted the petition as having said. 'Though the language is altered, its substantive content – criminalising vague and broad categories of speech and expression such as 'subversive activity', 'encouragement of separatist feelings', and acts 'endangering unity or integrity of India' – remains the same or is even more expansive,' it added. The petition also said that Section 152 was violative of fundamental rights under Article 14, Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 of the Constitution. While Article 14 pertains to equality, Article 19(1)(a) talks about free speech and Article 21 about right to life and personal liberty. The 'sweeping' language used in Section 152, 'including phrases like encouraging feelings of separatist activities, failed the test of constitutional validity due to vagueness, overbreadth, chilling effect, disproportionate punishment, and absence of proximate nexus to public disorder', it added. New criminal laws Three new criminal laws – the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – came into effect on July 1, 2024. They replaced the British-era Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. When introducing the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Union Home Minister Amit Shah had claimed that the new law ' completely repealed ' the sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. 'Everyone has the right to speak,' the home minister had said at the time. 'We are completely repealing sedition.' However, critics have argued that Section 152 of the BNS is a 'new version' of a colonial-era sedition law, which had been misused to harass, intimidate and persecute human rights defenders, activists, journalists, among others, for exercising their right to freedom of expression.
Hindustan Times
6 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Reconciling the questions about voter-roll integrity
The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, made serious allegations about the integrity of elections and electoral rolls in the country on Thursday. The Congress has alleged that some prima facie credible discrepancies in electoral rolls in a single assembly segment (Mahadevpura) made a critical difference to overall results in the Lok Sabha constituency of Bangalore Central, which was won by the Bharatiya Janata Party in the 2024 polls. Regions with a contested history of migration such as Assam have had long spells of unrest over electoral discrepancies, which led to controversial moves such as the NRC. (HT Photo) He also charged the Election Commission of India (ECI) — one of the most critical constitutional institutions which safeguards the sanctity of democratic competition and hence peaceful transfer of power — of colluding with the ruling dispensation. What is one to make of these allegations? Three things can be said. This is neither the first nor the last allegation of electoral rigging in India via various forms. These allegations are more likely to be levelled against a hegemonic political party that is difficult to dislodge from power. The Left Front and the Trinamool Congress in pre- and post-2011 West Bengal, Lalu Prasad Yadav's rule in Bihar in the 1990s — which brought the TN-Seshan-led ECI in direct conflict with the Bihar government — the BJP's allegations of rigged EVMs after its defeat in the 2009 elections, and the Congress's string of allegations against the BJP in the post-2019 period are some such instances. In many cases, the parties accused of such rigging eventually lost power, which suggests that even if there were irregularities, it was never strong enough to permanently subvert democratic sentiments. If one were to confine the argument to unscrupulously engineered electoral rolls — which is what Gandhi is alleging now — there is good reason to believe that these were never an epitome of integrity in the past. A data analysis in this newspaper found that the number of registered voters often exceeded the number of adults of voting age in the country (as seen in the census) in many past elections. All this, however, does not mean that Gandhi's allegations should be summarily dismissed. This is because the core of his demand is that ECI be more upfront and cooperative in sharing information about the electoral rolls, and their translation to actual voting, with political parties. While one might have to look carefully at the fine print of laws and rules vis-à-vis the mechanism of ECI sharing information with political parties, in principle, there is nothing wrong in raising such a demand. India has almost one billion voters now, and it is impractical to expect political parties to ascertain the integrity of electoral rolls without resorting to machine-based tools. ECI has to provide machine-readable electoral rolls for this to happen. The longer ECI stonewalls this demand, the more it will hurt its credibility. This brings us to the final point. Even if one were to accept, for the sake of argument, that political actors do try to contaminate electoral rolls to influence results — such allegations go back a long time in India — the question is: Can something be done at a systemic level to prevent this from happening? Regions with a contested history of migration such as Assam have had long spells of unrest over these issues, which in turn led to controversial moves such as the National Register of Citizens. In such instances, allegations about the lack of integrity of electoral rolls triggered mass unrest and often divisive and violent agitations, indicating that there was organic traction, justified or not, in the belief of large-scale vote tampering. Recent allegations about tampering have seen no such mass unrest, which suggests that they might not be as large in scale. Be that as it may, can ECI and the system as a whole do something about making electoral rolls more robust and immune to malfeasance? This is the proverbial elephant in the room. Should we move towards linking electoral rolls to other databases such as Aadhaar, which, theoretically, make it possible to eliminate discrepancies such as multiple entries for the same person or even prevent the same person voting more than once? Many voices driven by privacy concerns have opposed such moves, and there is some merit in their concerns about all this emboldening a larger surveillance State. However, it is also worth asking whether we are only protecting privacy on a de-jure basis while it is being blatantly violated by State and non-State actors colluding with each other to subvert it in a de-facto manner. Another option could be to resort to processes such as electoral-roll additions or deletions requiring mandatory approval of designated representatives of recognised political parties. As will be obvious to the discerning reader, neither of these processes can be deemed foolproof. The choice, as is always the case while making large databases, will be between wrongful inclusion and wrongful exclusion. The Opposition, with its attacks about fake voters, is emphasising wrongful inclusion. But, it is also protesting possible wrongful exclusion by opposing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, presently ongoing in Bihar. Logically, one cannot minimise one without letting the other increase. In an ideal world, ECI should have been a non-partisan body, making both the ruling party and Opposition realise the inherent tension between the concerns of wrong inclusion and exclusion in electoral rolls. But realpolitik and institutional propriety crossed the Rubicon of this ideal a long time ago, and it is condemned to veer towards the banks of one echo chamber or another. The views expressed are personal.
