The recent developments in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) paint a picture of simmering discontent and a populace yearning for justice and accountability from its government. The Muzaffarabad Public Action Committees’ (PAC) call for a long march to the capital city initially scheduled for May 11th, was met with a significant setback. Protests erupted in the Dadyal area, resulting in civilian casualties, including students, in clashes with law enforcement. Consequently, the march was rescheduled to May 10th, indicating the gravity of the situation and the determination of the dissenting voices.
In response to the impending march, the government has deployed a formidable security apparatus, comprising the Punjab Constabulary, Frontier Constabulary, and Azad Kashmir Police, and also detained over 70 activists of PAC reflecting the authorities’ apprehension towards the growing dissent.
The genesis of this unrest can be traced back to the legal dispute surrounding the construction of the Neelum Jhelum Hydropower Project and other hydroelectric ventures. Despite directives from the AJK High Court to reach an agreement with the Water & Power Development Authority (Wapda) and seek approval under AJK’s interim constitution, the government’s failure to comply has exacerbated public outrage.
This discontent has transcended the confines of legal disputes, manifesting in broader grievances. Instances such as the demand for wheat flour subsidies in Rawalakot and protests against inflated power bills in Muzaffarabad and Mirpur underscore the multifaceted nature of public discontent. What initially began as isolated protests evolved into a unified movement spanning across AJK, unaffiliated with mainstream political entities but backed by the advocacy of business leadership.
Central to the grievances are issues concerning governance, economic equity, and judicial accountability. The movement’s demands extend beyond the realm of hydroelectric projects, encompassing equitable distribution of hydropower resources, subsidies on essential commodities like flour, and the curtailment of privileges enjoyed by the political and bureaucratic elite.
The PAC’s strategies have been unconventional yet effective, leveraging public sentiment to exert pressure on the government. The collective refusal to pay electricity bills, endorsed by 80% of the population for nearly a year, served as a potent means of civil disobedience, compelling the government to acknowledge their demands.
Despite intermittent negotiations and concessions from the government, substantive progress remains elusive. The announcement of a strike on February 5th, followed by its withdrawal in the national interest, exemplifies the delicate balance between advocacy and broader societal concerns. However, the failure to reach consensus on critical issues, including hydroelectric projects and power tariffs, underscores the entrenched nature of systemic challenges.
As the PAC persists in its quest for justice, it has resorted to legal avenues, filing contempt of court petitions against the government and organizing successive long marches. These actions signify a steadfast commitment to holding the authorities accountable and upholding the rule of law.
In essence, the unrest in AJK epitomizes the inherent tension between governance and citizenry, emblematic of a broader struggle for democratic ideals and socio-economic justice. The onus lies on the government to heed the voices of dissent, address legitimate grievances, and embark on a path towards meaningful reform. Failure to do so risks perpetuating a cycle of unrest and eroding public trust in the institutions meant to serve them.