By T.N. Ashok
Pakistan-administered Kashmir has once again emerged as one of South Asia’s most politically volatile regions. What began as protests over soaring electricity bills, inflation and governance has now evolved into a broader political movement questioning the relationship between Islamabad and the territory it officially calls “Azad Jammu and Kashmir” (AJK).
The latest flashpoint is the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), which has issued Islamabad a 48-hour ultimatum over a 38-point charter of demands. The movement has threatened what it calls the “grand and final” phase of agitation ahead of regional elections scheduled for July 27, potentially setting the stage for one of the biggest confrontations between local residents and Pakistan’s federal establishment in years.
The protests are about far more than electoral politics. They expose decades of accumulated frustration over constitutional limitations, economic grievances, political representation and the distribution of the region’s abundant natural resources.
The immediate trigger is the controversy surrounding 12 legislative assembly seats reserved for refugees who migrated from Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan after Partition. JAAC argues that the arrangement distorts democratic representation.
While approximately 33 lakh residents living in Pakistan-administered Kashmir elect only 33 territorial constituencies, around 4.36 lakh registered refugee voters in Pakistan elect 12 assembly members. Protesters argue that this disproportionately expands Islamabad’s influence over the region’s politics.
The Pakistan-administered Kashmir Supreme Court recently ruled that these seats enjoy constitutional protection and cannot simply be abolished through executive action, leaving constitutional amendment as the only route for reform.
For JAAC, however, the issue has become symbolic of a larger complaint—that key political decisions affecting the territory are ultimately determined outside the region. JAAC is a relatively new organisation, having emerged in 2023, but it has rapidly transformed itself into the most influential civil society platform in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Initially, its demands centred on subsidised electricity generated from local hydropower projects, lower wheat prices and relief from inflation. Large demonstrations compelled Islamabad to announce financial concessions, giving the movement credibility among ordinary residents.
Its latest 38-point charter goes considerably further. It seeks greater political autonomy, constitutional reforms, increased local control over natural resources, electoral reforms and accountability in governance. The movement’s growing popularity suggests that economic grievances have merged with longstanding political frustrations.
Pakistan describes the territory as “Azad” or “Free” Kashmir. Yet its constitutional status remains unusual. Unlike Pakistan’s provinces, Pakistan-administered Kashmir is not formally incorporated into Pakistan under Article 1 of the Constitution. It has no representation in Pakistan’s National Assembly or Senate.
Instead, it operates under its own constitutional framework, while important matters—including defence, foreign affairs and significant aspects of governance—remain under the authority of institutions linked to Islamabad.
Another controversial provision requires candidates seeking election to affirm support for the territory’s eventual accession to Pakistan. Those advocating independence or alternative constitutional arrangements have long argued that this narrows political space, while Pakistan maintains that the provision reflects its position on the Kashmir dispute.
Critics of Islamabad have, over many years, alleged interference in local politics, including the influence of Pakistan’s security establishment over governments in the territory. Human rights organisations and independent analysts have also raised concerns over restrictions on freedom of expression, preventive detentions in some cases and limits on political activity.
Pakistan rejects accusations that democratic processes are systematically manipulated, maintaining that elections are conducted under constitutional procedures. Nevertheless, the recurring emergence of protest movements reflects a perception among sections of the population that local institutions possess only limited autonomy.
Perhaps nowhere is public anger stronger than over economic issues. Pakistan-administered Kashmir possesses significant hydropower potential and abundant forests and mineral resources. Massive hydroelectric projects generate electricity that supplies large parts of Pakistan.
Many residents argue that the communities living around these projects receive inadequate compensation while paying high electricity tariffs despite being located near the source of generation. These economic complaints have become central to JAAC’s campaign.
Residents also point to unemployment, inadequate healthcare infrastructure, limited industrial development and poor investment despite the region’s strategic importance. For many young people, migration has become one of the few viable economic options.
Pakistan-administered Kashmir occupies a sensitive position along the Line of Control separating it from the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The security environment has historically resulted in a significant presence of Pakistani military and security agencies.
Some political activists have alleged arrests of protest organisers and excessive force during demonstrations. Certain activists have claimed that hundreds have been detained and dozens killed during crackdowns in recent years. These allegations have not been independently verified and are disputed by Pakistani authorities.
International human rights organisations have periodically expressed concern over restrictions on civil liberties in both Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered parts of the former princely state, underscoring that human rights concerns are not confined to one side of the Line of Control.
India’s constitutional position has remained unchanged since Independence. New Delhi regards the entire former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir—including territories administered by Pakistan—as an integral part of India.
The Indian Parliament reinforced this position unanimously in its 1994 resolution, calling upon Pakistan to vacate territories under its control. The issue has acquired renewed political prominence under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), whose leaders have repeatedly asserted that Pakistan-administered Kashmir will eventually return to Indian administration.
While such statements are politically significant, successive Indian governments have avoided outlining any military roadmap, recognising the enormous strategic risks associated with any attempt to alter the status quo between two nuclear-armed neighbours.
The origins of the dispute continue to shape contemporary politics. After the accession of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir to India in October 1947, Indian forces were airlifted to defend the territory against tribal forces from Pakistan, supported by elements of the Pakistani military.
The subsequent war ended with a United Nations-mediated ceasefire in January 1949, leaving Pakistan in control of roughly one-third of the former princely state. Within India, a long-running political debate continues over Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s decision to accept the ceasefire and refer aspects of the dispute to the United Nations.
Many BJP leaders and some retired military officers have argued that India could have recovered additional territory had military operations continued. Other historians contend that the military situation was more complex, that logistical challenges were substantial, and that the ceasefire reflected wider diplomatic and strategic considerations of the time.
The debate remains one of independent India’s most enduring historical controversies. A Liability for Pakistan, A Continuing Challenge for India.
For Pakistan, repeated protest movements reveal the growing difficulty of governing a strategically vital but politically restless territory. For India, Pakistan-administered Kashmir remains both an unresolved territorial claim and a persistent security concern linked to cross-border militancy, diplomacy and regional stability.
Neither side appears willing to fundamentally alter its position. Yet the emergence of JAAC suggests that local concerns—electricity prices, employment, constitutional rights, representation and governance—are increasingly taking centre stage alongside the larger India-Pakistan dispute.
Whether Islamabad responds through reforms or greater security measures will shape the region’s immediate future. As the July 27 elections approach, Pakistan-administered Kashmir once again finds itself at the intersection of local aspirations, national politics and one of the world’s longest-running territorial disputes.
The coming weeks will determine whether the latest movement becomes another passing episode of unrest or develops into a sustained challenge to Islamabad’s management of the region. (IPA Service)
