Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani

On both sides of LOC, Kashmiri politics seems to have been overrun by the Albatross curse. It has lost its nerve to endure in dignity the associate pressure and character to remain faithful. On one side of LOC there is a strange talk of a ‘secret’ talk. It is not clear why the secret has to be kept from the people of Kashmir and why the leadership after so much of harm caused to life and habitat of Kashmir, don’t feel any need to validate the agenda from the people. Rights Movement has endured pain and suffering in secret and in the open.
A reliable preparedness for any talk has to be referred to the people or debated in a transparent manner. Since the political discipline adopted in the constitution on 31 July 1993 has been shelved and the manner in which  militant leaders either switched over to non violence or decided to take a position in the J & K assembly, common man and woman in Kashmir have a right to know more about all that is supposed to be ‘secret’. People need to know about the substantive agenda of the two sides and their honest resolve to serve the people of Kashmir.

Indian approach to remain unconcerned about the ‘hard line’ school of politics lead by Syed Ali Shah Geelani embeds a failure in itself. The certified ‘moderates’ should not take any pleasure out of the absence of their opposite camp. The start of a ‘secret talk’ in this selective or preferred manner would disadvantage the process of any dialogue and without doubt advantage the ‘hardliner’ camp, if there is anything soft and hard in the Rights Movement for Kashmiri title to self-determination. There is nothing hard and nothing soft if one interprets the jurisprudence of Kashmir case honestly and in the best interests of the people of Kashmir.
Hurriyat (G) and Hurriyat (M) or any other school of opinion in Kashmir do not have a conclusive right to take all the decisions for their children and grandchildren. The present political and militant set up does not complete the circle of wisdom and representation. Therefore, a lot has to be left for tomorrow to be decided by our future generations. Hurriyat (G) and Hurriyat (M) should not forget that they carry a moral, ethical and criminal liability for the death of a generation. They may have advanced their social status in a myriad many ways but they have not advanced the welfare or benefit of the common people. Common man and woman stand impoverished, humbled and bruised.
The first and foremost test of any leadership domiciled in Srinagar, is whether or not they have faith in the territorial integrity of the State as defined in article 4 of the constitution of J and K and as endorsed in the constitution of All Parties Hurriyat Conference adopted on 31 July 1993. A more significant question would be to decide whether self determination is for all the citizens of the State or only for those who lost elections in 1987 and decided to wreck their vengeance. One more far more important question would be to assure the common man and woman that our leaders moderate or hard line are honestly free in their thinking during any ‘secret’ talk.  Independence of opinion during any dialogue is not guaranteed because post 1990 our leaders, political and militant, have used the cover of dialogue to cultivate private interests in India and Pakistan. They have tainted their credibility by offering themselves in the share market of profit.
On the other side of LOC AJK assembly at Muzaffarabad was preparing to charge on prime minister Sardar Yaqoob on 15 October and unseat him through a vote of no confidence. He was taken unawares by the move and to escape a roll call against him he decided or was coerced to resign. It is ironic that the faction that unseated prime minister Atiq Ahmed Khan 9 months before decided to rewrite their loyalties to bring down the sitting prime minister. A laughable part of the process has been that the political faction involved in the first and second vote of no confidence did not change the text of allegations. The charges mentioned in the no-confidence motion – corruption, mismanagement, misuse of power – are virtually unchanged.
I was asked to opine on the merits of the exercise of powers by the Government of Pakistan to remove the Government in AJK using its powers under article 56. A use of article 56 would have ensured that Muslim Conference does not arrest the advantage by forcing out Sardar Yaqoob through a vote of no confidence. My opinion was that AJK has moved far ahead from 1975 when Government of Pakistan exercised its power under article 56, from 1977 when Martial Government in Pakistan removed the Government in AJK and from 1991  when prime minister Mumtaz Rathore was bundled in a helicopter and brought to Islamabad and signalled ‘politely’ to  dissolve the assembly. I further opined that any such exercise would be repugnant to the responsibilities assumed by the Government of Pakistan under UNCIP resolutions in Azad Kashmir (territory under its control). My argument was that use of article 56 would be an abuse of trust obligation and without any lawful authority. I expressed my opinion publicly in an interview with Urdu daily Jammu and Kashmir published from Islamabad, Pakistan.
The tragedy with all Governments in AJK has been that these have never had a popular legislature elected through a freely expressed vote. Governments in Muzaffarabad have an overwhelming input from a section in the establishment of Pakistan and military leadership based at Murree has a final vote. It was the overweight of Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan which discouraged him to continue to walk up the long stream of steps at Murree to be patted on the back for continued tenures as prime minister. He packed political ambition lock, stock and barrel. But continues to remain a driving force in both motions of no confidence. It was on this hope that Atiq Ahmed Khan is said to have held various meetings in Murree before going ahead with his no confidence plan.
It is a tragedy that people of Azad Kashmir are subjected to a constitution which is authored in Pakistan and has been put to vote under the express instructions of the Government of Pakistan. The instruction reads – “...in the discharge of its responsibilities under the UNCIP Resolutions, the Government of Pakistan has approved the proposed repeal and re-enactment of the said Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act 1970 and authorised the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir to introduce the present Bill in the Legislative Assembly of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for consideration and passage”. As against AJK constitution the constitution of Jammu and Kashmir has been adopted in the name of the people. It is the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir on either side of LOC who are manipulated as unequal people by the two strong nations of India and Pakistan. The manipulation in the unstable political culture of Pakistan is exceptionally brutal and hurtful.

Author is London based Secretary General of JKCHR – NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations.  Email This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it