India’s decisions on IIOJK tantamount to suppress basic human rights, violation of UNSC resolutions

Syed Abrar Hussain (Former ambassador)

The third oppressed Kashmiri generation like that of the people of South Sudan and East Timor are looking forward to implementation of the UNSC resolutions to gain their basic rights to self-determination. But the unilateral decisions of India on the fate of the IIOJK have kept on blatantly suppressing basic human rights of the Kashmiri people and violating international laws of justice – showing least concern about the UN resolutions and disputed status of the territory.

India has unilaterally taken the unlawful decision to revoke the special status of IIOJK on August 5, 2019, to bring about demographic changes in the region – to turn Kashmiris into minority by giving domiciles to non-Kashmiris which is a blatant violation of the Article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention.

It is not possible for India to snatch the basic rights of self-determination from Kashmiri people. This right has already been recognized by the United Nations and the first Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru who has repeatedly promised a plebiscite to the people of Kashmir, which was never held.

But sadly, no action was taken during the first four years on the illegal decision of the government by the Indian Supreme Court where a case was registered against the illegal move on IIOJK on August 5, 2019. Intentionally, the period has given enough time to the government to suppress the voice of the Kashmiri people through all possible means of the Indian state security apparatus.

But last year, more shockingly, the Indian SC has supported the unlawful and unilateral move of India on disputed territory of IIOJK. The recent Indian SC’s verdict on IIOJK is based on the supposition that during 1947, the Kashmiri Raja decided to join India. But the SC has ignored the UN resolutions and promises made by the Indian leadership of the plebiscite to the people of Kashmir.

India cannot bypass the UN resolutions and international laws. Similarly, it cannot forcefully impose the illegal decision on the disputed territory Kashmir. It is clear from the Article 122 of the UNSC 1957 resolution that the final destiny of IOJK lies in the hands of the indigenous people of Kashmir ¬based on a plebiscite as per their aspirations.

The renowned lawyer, Kapil Sibal has acknowledged the fact during the debate on the disputed territory in the Indian SC that historically and geographically, Kashmir has no relations whatsoever with the present-day India. He argued that Radcliffe during the partition of the Subcontinent had deceitfully paved the way for Kashmir. He also said at that time, Pakistan had agreed on a referendum in Junagarh and it also believed that the same would take place in Kashmir.

The pleading of the so-called case in the Indian SC has made fun of the Kashmiri people as it has asked Mohammad Akbar Lon to submit an affidavit in the SC that he would remain loyal to the Constitution of India despite the fact that he is a member of the Lok Sabha. The Indian SC’s verdict is in absolute contrast with the Indian Constitution as its Article 51 states that India was bound to follow international laws. However, the 2019 decision regarding IIOJK is against the international laws.

Similarly, according to Article 3 of the Constitution, without the consent of the Assembly, no change could occur on the geographical border of any state. However, the disputed state of IIOJK has been divided into two parts without taking the assembly of the state into confidence while Ladakh is made a separate area. The Indian SC has approved this whole illegal process.

Likewise, according to Article 370, in order to revoke special status of the territory, consent of the state assembly was required. But a lame excuse and baseless arguments were made as it stated that the state was under the Governor Raj, therefore, Indian Parliament was given equal status to that of the state assembly.

Therefore, the government of Pakistan has rejected the unlawful verdict of the Indian SC regarding the IIOJK and sought to resolve the issue of the disputed territory in light of the UNSC resolutions and as per the aspirations of the people of Kashmir. The Foreign Office said in its statement on December 11, 2023 that Pakistan does not accept the supremacy of the Indian Constitution in the disputed territory. The Indian SC’s verdict has undermined the aspirations of the people of Kashmir and it could not replace plebiscite.

Now all possible efforts have been made from the Indian state institutions including Parliament, judiciary, and Army to suppress the rights of Kashmiri people to self-determination. Therefore, Indians have unleashed the onslaught of terror and force to subjugate the spirit of the people. But despite the ongoing Indian state terrorism, the free minds and hearts of the people of Kashmir continued to disturb India.