What’s at stake as Kashmir goes to the polls | Mohsin Raza Khan & Shashank Ranjan

The Indian government will have to take a considered view on doing more than statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.

Embarking on a mountain in Kashmir, while running a temperature, is a bad idea, especially when elections in India’s newest Union Territory are around the corner.

Kashmir has not had an elected government for five years during which time it was directly administered by the central government.

But now that elections will be held in three phases – September 18, 25 and October 1, with counting of votes on October 4 – a different kind of fever has set in, signalling a degree of enthusiasm also felt during parliamentary polls this summer when the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir recorded 58.46 percent voter turnout.

Jammu and Kashmir goes to the polls against the backdrop of a recent Union Home Ministry amendment to the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act which grants the Delhi-appointed lieutenant governor authority over the bureaucracy, judiciary and the police.

This move, in effect, enhanced the lieutenant governor’s power over transfers and postings of all-India service officers, including those in the Indian Administrative Service and the police.

It also only heightens the real fear that the election may yet prove to be an illusion.

There is little doubt restoring statehood to Jammu and Kashmir should be top priority.

However, in the event the Delhi state government model of central control is imposed on Jammu and Kashmir, the larger purpose of the election will be defeated, which will give the people a justifiable reason to oppose Delhi’s policies.

Such an ominous development will present Pakistan an opportunity to fish in troubled waters.

During their electoral campaigns across Jammu and Kashmir, leaders of various political parties have made no secret of repeatedly raising the issue of statehood.

The Election Commission’s decision to go ahead with the polls without being cowed by the adverse security situation in the Jammu region is encouraging.

After all, past elections, such as those in 1995 and 2001, were held in even more precarious circumstances with reasonably high levels of militant attacks, violation of ceasefire conditions along the Line of Control and the consequent actions by security forces.

Voter turnout

The most crucial driver, among a set of other factors, for announcing the September-October election schedule was the respectable voter turnout in the parliamentary elections.

Despite the gerrymandering of constituencies by the Indian government, aimed at reducing the number of seats in the Kashmir Valley and raising them in the Jammu region, the election this time is expected to generate considerable enthusiasm.

The people of Jammu and Kashmir have been yearning for representation and have shown they are eager for some level of self-determination.

The Delhi model of governance has shown that constant friction between the legislature and the centre-appointed lieutenant governor would defeat the purpose in Jammu and Kashmir.

Should this happen, the degree of frustration and unmet expectations will have to be borne by all at a time when the security forces are already stretched thin on the Chinese, Myanmar and Bangladesh borders, as well as in Manipur.

The Kashmiri awaam (populace) which in the past often braved violence and boycott calls by separatists and militants, has historically looked forward to various types of elections.

More importantly, as in the rest of India, electoral participation in the lower levels of polls has been greater since elected representatives are more intimately connected to the people.

Local elections, especially in Jammu and Kashmir’s villages, have seen voter turnout as high as 80 percent. By this measure, the assembly polls will likely witness participation greater than what was during the parliamentary polls.

Going beyond the obvious

However, holding elections and restoring statehood is merely an initial step towards fulfilling the democratic aspirations of a society. Much ground needs to be covered beyond these.

The expression of the people’s will through the ballot ought not to be viewed as approval. The reasons people vote vary and they should be analysed accurately. For example, candidates opposing abrogation of Article 370, some from mainstream parties, won comfortable majorities in the parliamentary elections.

In what can be considered a protest vote, independent candidate Sheikh Rashid, popularly known as Engineer Rashid, was elected MP from a constituency where former Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and the BJP’s Sajjad Lone also contested.

Despite being an MP, Rashid was jailed along with hundreds of journalists, academics and activists who were arrested under flimsy charges in 2019. He is now out on interim bail from the special National Investigation Agency court for campaigning until October 2 in a move which is seen to be the central government’s attempt at weakening the pro-India traditional political parties.

Government employees, dozens of journalists and academics have been sacked or arrested for writing newspaper articles published as far back as 2010 and 2016. Many newspaper publishers have been shut down. Such measures, along with the continued suspension of statehood, can only be viewed as contrary to the people’s will.

The way ahead should be to bridge the divide between what the people think and what may be considered normative.

Jammu and Kashmir’s electorate has historically detested being controlled by New Delhi. It is worth recalling the calamitous legacy of rigged elections in the past, especially in 1987 which were seen as a catalyst for the insurgency that followed. The betrayal of the democratic process led many disillusioned young people to take up arms, altering the course of Kashmir’s history.

Maybe it was to heal the deep wounds of conflict and death on Kashmir’s collective psyche that prompted Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, one of the five Supreme Court judges who upheld the abrogation of Article 370 in December 2023, to recommend setting up an “impartial Truth and Reconciliation Commission”.

This panel was to investigate and report on the human rights violations since the 1980s and recommend measures for reconciliation.

“The exercise should be time-bound. There is already an entire generation of youth that has grown up with feelings of distrust and it is to them that we owe the greatest duty of reparation,” the judge said.

We might sound like Cassandras on Kashmir but, contrary to Justice Kaul, the expediency of ticking the box seems to be the national government’s priority. Even as the people’s will and trust have been dismissed, one hopes that this fever doesn’t become chronic for all of us.

(Authors: Mohsin Raza Khan is a Professor at the Jindal School of International Affairs, O.P Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana.; Shashank Ranjan is an Associate Professor at the Jindal School of International Affairs, O.P Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana)

[Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info.org]