Critics argue that India's rule over Kashmir lacks legitimacy due to the region's disputed status following the 1947 partition of India and Pakistan, which gave rise to conflicting claims over Kashmir. The region's accession to India was conditional and hinged on a plebiscite that has never been conducted, leading many to view India's governance as an imposition rather than a legitimate claim. Additionally, widespread human rights abuses and the suppression of local dissent have further undermined the perceived legitimacy of India's control. Consequently, many Kashmiris and international observers advocate for self-determination as a more legitimate resolution to the conflict.
Legitimacy
legitimacy
It is the same as the US. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. It is the same because of Britain's rule over India till 1947
Legitimacy
Reinforcing Afghan accountability and legitimacy.
De facto
It is important, as it gives the government legitimacy. ~ APEX
prove the legitimacy of dynastic rule
A legitimacy is seen as a state or government being accepted and recognized by the law and by the people - to have power and the right to rule.
The laws and legislation of these countries differ, as do the rules of jurisprudence. You need to be more specific.
Reinforcing Afghan accountability and legitimacy
the amritsar massacre was a turning point o many indias, it convince them of the evils of the british rule .