pro-independence candidates also in the fray

Mir Afzaal Sulehria is a Muzaffarabad born political activist who has always struggled for emergence of a sovereign state of Jammu and Kashmir, currently divided between the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbors - India and Pakistan.

He is among a dozen or so nationalists, contesting the upcoming elections for the Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) Legislative Assembly from different constituencies on behalf of some pro-independence organisations.

When the presidential and Legislative Assembly elections were held in AJK for the first time on the basis of adult franchise in 1970, many pro-independence leaders were among the contestants for the Assembly seats, including pioneer guerrilla leader Mohammad Maqbool Butt, who was in the fray from three constituencies of Pakistan based Kashmiri refugee.

Raja Muzaffar, a former senior leader of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), who was his polling agent in Rawalpindi Cantonment area at that time, alleges that non-Kashmiris, instead of the genuine Kashmiri voters, were facilitated to ensure Mr Butt did not succeed.

“All my objections against vote casting by non-Kashmiris were rejected outright by the officials concerned,” he recalls.

The presidential election was won by Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan of Muslim Conference (MC), a pro-establishment party, defeating contemporaries K H Khurshid and Sardar Ibrahim Khan.

Hardly a year in office, President Qayyum introduced a provision in the AJK’s Constitution of 1970 to serve as a stumbling block to the nationalists’ participation in the electoral process.

The constitutional amendment bill that included some other important things such as the fundamental rights, establishment of supreme court, mention of Gilgit-Baltistan etc. was passed by the legislature in the absence of a dissenting voice from the then opposition.

When the 1970 Constitution was replaced by the existing AJK Interim Constitution Act 1974 the same provision was retained and there was no dissenting voice this time either from any other political party.

The provision reads: “No person or political party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the State’s accession to Pakistan.”

An aspiring candidate for the Legislative Assembly is required to put his signature under the following declaration.

“I have consented to my nomination (by the proposer and seconder); I am not subject to any disqualification; and I believe in the ideology of Pakistan, ideology of state’s accession to Pakistan, and the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan.

After the launch of armed struggle in India-held Kashmir in 1989, nationalist elements have by and large stayed away from the AJK’s power politics. And whenever some of them took part in the process, they crossed out the declaration about accession of Kashmir to Pakistan - but only to see their nomination papers rejected by the Election Commission.

“When they say that Kashmir is a disputed territory and its ultimate fate is yet to be decided by its people through a free, fair and impartial plebiscite, how can they put embargoes on the choice of people before that stage,” says Sardar Rasheed Khan, a Rawalakot based member of the JKLF supreme council.

Though JKLF has announced boycott to the polls, some pro-independence parties have however adopted a different strategy this time round to avail themselves of this opportunity.

Except for one candidate, the rest did not cross out the declaration and hence they are among the 423 validly nominated candidates for the July 21 polls.

“We have done it under a game plan… History shows that even the founder of Pakistan had sworn allegiance to the British crown in the beginning even though he struggled against it for partition of the sub-continent,” Mr Sulehria says.

However, many, including a most respected former jurist, believe that the provision has proved to be the counterproductive.

“The UN Resolutions give a choice to the Kashmiris to decide between India and Pakistan but we have already excluded India,” says Basharat Ahmed Shaikh, a former judge of the AJK Supreme Court.

“Though the majority has digested this exclusion without demur, this provision has however turned out to be the counterproductive because it has given room to our enemy (a reference to India) to launch propaganda against Pakistan,” he adds.

Mr Muzaffar, who is settled in the US since long after seeking political asylum, echoes same views with different reasoning.

“The provision, inserted in violation to the fundamental rights, has not served the cause of Kashmir and interests of Pakistan,” he maintains.

“These laws and practices are also in contradiction to the pledges made by the government of Pakistan to the international community and the UN. On the one hand, Pakistan says that UN Security Council resolutions must apply, but our Constitution prohibits it on the other.”

Former AJK secretary law Syed Atta Mohyuddin Qadri also terms the section “a reflection of colonial attitude” and his contemporary Shaukat Jan Bachh, also a retired secretary, says it’s “irrelevant and against the fundamental rights of Kashmiris.”

“It has served to the opportunist politicians only… The cause of Kashmir has been damaged and interests of Pakistan have been made questionable,” Bachh maintains.

But, Afsar Shahid, a minister in the outgoing PPP government, defends the condition as one of the “foundational values” required to run a state.

Fifteen years ago, Mr Shahid had contested elections from his Dadyal constituency in district Mirpur as a candidate of Kashmir Freedom Movement (KFM), a “semi” pro-independence party he headed since 1989. However, he did not succeed. In the last general elections, he clinched victory as a nominee of the PPP. 

“This condition has balked designs to create anarchy in Azad Kashmir at the behest of Indian agencies,” he argues.

“As far as activities of nationalists are concerned, there is no ban on them. The JKLF for example, which is a major pro-independence organization, happens to have its head office in Pakistan since long,” he adds.  

Mr Sulehria, 35, says candidates from his Kashmir National Party have two-point manifesto: AJK should get 70 pc profit of mega projects launched by Pakistan in its territory and the 12 seats of Pakistan based Kashmiri refugees should be abolished.

However, analyst Syed Arif Bahar has a different perspective. 

“Now people rarely cast their votes owing to the ideology of the candidate, but on the basis of his clan, personal goodwill and capacity to address their day to day civic and employment related issues. And that’s why candidates from major parties get preference at the hands of the electorate,” he maintains.

“Since the candidates from the nationalist parties do not fit in to this criteria they draw negligible votes, he adds.

“And that’s why I believe this provision has merely served as a propaganda tool for India on the one hand and for those who seek asylum in European countries on the other.”

Tariq Naqash