Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8


UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing

Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir
By Samreen Mushtaq & Mudasir Amin, TRT World

02 July 2018

The reaction to the UN report from within India reveals that for any positive change to take
place in Kashmir, India needs to reverse its current course.

Seventy years ago, on 1 January 1948, India took the matter of Jammu and Kashmir to the
United Nations Security Council accusing Pakistan of having attacked the 'Indian territory'. It
went on to ask the UN to prevent such action.

This followed the 1947 partition of the subcontinent into India and Pakistan, where Jammu and
Kashmir, as a princely state, did not accede to either of the two.

The Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh, who was ruling Kashmir at that time, was quite unpopular and
it was under his command that the Jammu massacre of over 200,000 Muslims was carried out,
as the Muslims of the Poonch area rose in rebellion.
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

This led to the formation of a provincial Azad Kashmir government in Rawalpindi, and a 'tribal
invasion' from Pakistan. The Maharaja, to curb a potential uprising, sought help from India,
eventually signing an Instrument of Accession.

This controversial document is at the heart of the conflict between India and Pakistan, and its
very existence has come under question, as well as the apparent timing of when it was signed,
and whether or not the Maharaja was under duress when signing it. Further, Pakistan maintains
that the Maharaja had no right to sign an accession when a "standstill" agreement was already
in place with Pakistan.

However, since the will of the subjects wasn't in the Maharaja's favour, the question over the
legitimacy of accession, and if he had the right to decide on all Kashmiri's behalf, continues to
this day.

A state of never-ending violations

On the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—while Kashmiri's

demands for the right to self-determination are met with brutal suppression—the United
Nations has come up with its first ever human rights report on Kashmir.

The report, Developments in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir from June 2016 to April
2018, and General Human Rights Concerns in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan was
released by the UNHCR in June, without a prior press release.

Over the years, the Indian state has attempted to curb the work of journalists as well as civil
society groups like the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), by not allowing them
to hold press conferences, or conduct talks, and going so far as to imprison a program
coordinator under the Public Safety Act.

In May 2015, after receiving remarks on its report from the Indian government, Amnesty
International delayed the release of its report, before releasing it in July. Therefore, it is by no
means a surprise if the UN chose to not make public their launch of the report, until it was
officially released, in a bid to avoid any obstruction from India.

The 49-page report primarily covers the developments in India-administered Kashmir following
the killing of the popular Hizb ul Mujahideen commander Burhan Muzaffar Wani in 2016 which
resulted in unprecedented protests across the valley and unabated violence by the Indian

It also looks into the developments in Pakistan-administered Kashmir during the same period,
although the primary focus is the India-administered territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

The report acknowledges that, "there is an urgent need to address past and ongoing human
rights violations and abuses and deliver justice for all people in Kashmir, who for seven decades
have suffered a conflict that has claimed or ruined numerous lives."

The report draws attention to the structures of impunity in Jammu and Kashmir that operate
under the command of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and the Public Safety Act
(PSA). The military courts and the justice system serve within this skewed paradigm which
denies a proper avenue to address civilian grievances, instead acting as an obstacle to any
dispensation of justice and accountability.

The report uses data from civil society groups, government statements, calls for inquiries and
the subsequent (lack of) results. It is an exhaustive documentation of the killings, torture, the
use of pellet shotguns that blinded countless Kashmiris, enforced disappearances, sexual
violence, arbitrary arrests, illegal detentions of minors, civilian killings at encounter sites,
targeting of ambulances, communication blockades, media gags, arrest of journalists and
activists. It also highlights the impact of curfews and strikes on education, and killings by the
militants of armed forces personnel not on active duty, killings and threats to Kashmiri Pandits,
and of civilians accused of being informers.

It also expresses concern regarding the ceasefire violations resulting in casualties on both sides
of the Line of Control.

The report highlights the problems in Azad and Jammu Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan-
administered Kashmir where people aren't granted the full rights afforded to all citizens in
other parts of Pakistan. Freedom of expression in these areas is under attack and Pakistan's
Anti-Terrorism Act is used to imprison those critical of the state.

Noting how despite an autonomous government, the Government of Pakistan continues to

exercise extensive control over AJK, the report however clarifies that these problems,
compared to the issues in India-administered Kashmir, "are of a different calibre or magnitude
and of a more structural nature."

An important clarification in the report is regarding Resolution 47 of the UN Security Council

wherein Pakistan was to secure the withdrawal of tribesmen and Pakistani fighters from J&K.
Indian commentators have often used the argument of Pakistan’s inability to abide by this to
put the onus of the failure of a plebiscite on Pakistan.

However, as the report notes, a later resolution had clarified that this meant 12,000 to 18,000
soldiers staying on the Indian side and 3,000 to 6,000 on the Pakistani side of the ceasefire line -
a resolution rejected by both the countries.
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

In noting the Indian state’s response to the uprising following Burhan Wani killing, the report
states, "the killing of civilians between 2016 and 2018 raises the question of whether security
forces resorted to excessive use of force to respond to protesters, some of whom were
throwing rocks."

This narrative of determining ‘excessive force’ becomes problematic because it's designed to
counter criticism of the Indian state's repeated use of pellet shotguns as a non-lethal means of
crowd control. This is an attempt to justify its often brutal response and temper the criticism
that it uses ‘excessive force’, even in ‘self-defence’, against otherwise violent ‘stone pelters’.

Another point that the report highlighted is that while Kashmir had been independent between
the period of partition and the signing of the Instrument of Accession, the subsequent UN
resolution "did not provide an option for the people of Kashmir to choose independence." This
statement has been made with no further comment and without addressing what it means in
the present context. One is left to wonder why the cursory statement was included at all if it
was going to be left without word of its current implications or any recommendations on how
to proceed.

The report's prescription for India to deal with political prisoners is to "release or, if
appropriate, charge under applicable criminal offences all those held under administrative
detention," since most of the PSA detainees are never charged but languish in custody.

In India-admnistered Kashmir laws are manipulated to create an evironment of lawlessness.

How will charging people with criminal offences make life any better for those detained, and
how does this ensure a fair system, when the very premise of the system is set up to ensure the
Indian state's impunity and illegal control?

Too little, too late

Since the release of the report, there have been a number of developments in Kashmir. The
killing of a senior journalist, almost everyday killings of militants and civilians, the split of the
ruling BJP-PDP coalition, and the Indian state openly declaring its plan of a ‘muscular policy’ in

India's policy towards Kashmir has always been experienced by Kashmiris in the form of
violence over their bodies and psyches, and the UN needs to openly acknowledge that these
are war crimes against a people, while the manifestation of "the world's largest democracy" in
Kashmir has an uglier form.
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

Of course the UN report has come a little too late. Seven decades of unfulfilled promises,
killings, torture, enforced disappearances, sexual violence, everyday militarisation - all in the
name of upholding the idea of India in Kashmir.

Despite having been approached to play the role of a mediator, even seven decades later, a
continuous request for the last two years for unconditional access to the India or Pakistan
administered territories for monitoring purposes was not given to the UN and it had to instead
rely on "reasonable grounds standard of proof."

For human rights groups active in Kashmir, the report is significant despite the fact that
organisations like Amnesty International, or JKCCS and the Association of Parents of
Disappeared Persons (APDP) have been locally documenting these violations for a long time.
The fact that it has come from the UN lends credence and weight to their work and gives the
issue the international attention it deserves - even if the Indian state conveniently denies it.

The recommendations in the UN report are what advocacy groups can employ as they put forth
their demands to resolve the conflict. The press statement by APDP and JKCCS regarding the UN
report, notes that "this report has deep symbolic value following years of silence by the United

For the people who have consistently appealed to the UN expecting an intervention for
decades, it is, perhaps, a little too late. But at least unlike the reports of most NGOs and civil
society groups that have reduced the Kashmir issue to a case of human rights violations without
contextualising the historical and political realities—conveniently ignoring the larger political
question—the UN report closes with a strong recommendation to both India and Pakistan:
"fully respect the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir as protected under
international law."

That the UN hasn’t over the years been able to get the Government of India to even consider
moving beyond its "integral part of India" approach, is another critique altogether.

Maybe in its next report on Kashmir, the UN could start with acknowledging its failures. The
report notes that the Security Council resolutions on Kashmir cannot be terminated except by a
decision of the Security Council itself, and this report should also be a wake up call for the
Security Council itself.

How India has reacted

Unsurprisingly, in its initial response India's Ministry of External Affairs has "rejected" the report
as "fallacious, tendentious and motivated", calling it "a selective compilation of largely
unverified information . . . to build a false narrative."
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

One look at the graffitied streets of Kashmir and the slogans that pour out from there tell a
different tale - one that the Indian state has never acknowledged.

On the same evening when the UN report was released, one of Kashmir’s senior journalists,
Shujaat Bukhari was shot dead by unknown gunmen outside the press enclave in Srinagar.
Writing in the Hindustan Times in the aftermath of Bukhari’s killing, India’s leading journalist
Barkha Dutt argued for a reboot in India’s Kashmir policy; others asked for the army to be given
a free hand in Kashmir, as if it didn’t already have one.

Dutt went on to praise the Indian state for rejecting the ‘airy-fairy’ UN report. Shekhar Gupta,
President of the Editors Guild of India termed the report "idiotic, toxic and 'fatally flawed."
Going one step further, Gupta considered debating the "accuracy, fairness, methodology or
motives" as a waste of time. It's pertinent to mention here that Gupta, in 2016, failing to even
acknowledge the crimes of Indian forces in Kashmir, spoke of Kunanposhpora mass rape
allegations as merely stereotypes of the rough 90s.

Sreemoy Talukdar of Firstpost questioned the very moral authority of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights by labelling him a quasi-Islamist simply because of his Muslim
identity. Terming the report mischievous, Talukdar accused it of creating a false equivalence vis-
à-vis Pakistan.

These journalists have either not gone through the sections on human rights violations in
Pakistan-Administered Kashmir or they expect the report to blame Pakistan for all the violence
that Indian forces have unleashed in Kashmir.

The accusation speaks volumes about the state of journalism in India. As the report itself notes,
it is not a fact-finding report and most of the information on Kashmir has been drawn from
Right to Information (RTI) responses by the government of India, local, national and
international NGOs, human rights defenders, parliamentary questions, court orders, and police
reports, with the Press Trust of India being considered as a reliable source throughout the

If the Indian state and its media call the report motivated or fallacious, it is an indictment of its
own institutions which the report has so heavily relied on. When journalists question the
reports reliance on remote monitoring rather than actual fieldwork, they deliberately ignore
that the lack of fieldwork is a result of the refusal of permissions from the Indian state to do on-
ground research. Are these accusations from the media coming from the journalistic quest for
truth or from loyalty to India?

For Kashmiris, this only further solidifies the fact that India’s brutalities in Kashmir have always
been accompanied by the Indian media's obfuscation of the ground realities in Kashmir;
UN Human Rights Report Is A Scathing Indictment Of India’s Role In Kashmir

misappropriating it as a law and order issue; that it's "sponsored" by Pakistan, and just
generally standing by the militaristic state.

Why is the publication of a human rights report problematic for journalists whose primary goal
is to speak truth to power? When Indian journalists speak of, and on behalf of Kashmiris, one
wonders what base of expertise they have to do so. These journalists go out of their way to
legitimise—in the supposed national interest—the violence of the Indian state in Kashmir, and
are unable to come to terms with the fact that Kashmiris can, and will stand up for themselves.

The UN report is as damning an indictment of Indian institutions and the state as much as it is
an indictment of the tragic environment created inside Kashmir.

All rights reserved by the publisher. Disseminated in public interest.

Opinion Link:
About YFK

Our goal: We focus on the Kashmiri people's

right to education, healthcare, and the right to
legal representation. Our mission is to forge
relationships to peacefully resolve the oldest
pending conflict on UNSC agenda.

Our organization: YFK–International Kashmir

Lobby Group (Youth Forum For Kashmir) is a
non-partisan, international non-governmental
organization, working for the peaceful
resolution of Kashmir Conflict in accordance
with United Nations Security Council (UNSC)
Resolutions. YFK works with UN mechanisms,
especially the UN Human Rights Council
(UNHRC), and international rights groups. We
work closely with human rights defenders and
lawyers in India, and with activists in Indian-
occupied Kashmir and Pakistan-administered
Azad Jammu & Kashmir, and with young
activists worldwide.

Main Office | 14, Main Nazim-Ud-Din Road, F-11/4,

Islamabad, PAKISTAN
T: +92 51 229 1088 | F: +92 51 843 7781 |
Srinagar | Muzaffarabad | Lahore | Peshawar | Karachi | Quetta