The erosion of Justice In Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir
A critical examination of detentions under UAPA
By Altaf Hussain Wani
The erosion of justice in Indian-occupied Kashmir, particularly through the application of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), represents a critical challenge to human rights, the rule of law, and democratic principles. The UAPA, with its vague definitions and broad scope, has been weaponized to suppress dissent, leading to arbitrary detentions, prolonged incarcerations, and the denial of fair trials. This article critically examines the implications of UAPA in Kashmir, focusing on its impact on justice and human rights through the lens of notable cases, including those of Khurram Parvez and Yasin Malik.
The UAPA and Its Implications
The UAPA, enacted in 1967, was designed to combat unlawful activities and terrorism. However, its ambiguous language and expansive interpretation have enabled its misuse, particularly in politically sensitive regions under Indian occupation ie Jammu and Kashmir. The law allows authorities to detain individuals based on mere suspicion, often without substantial evidence or due process. This has created a legal environment where dissent is criminalized, and civil liberties are curtailed.
In Kashmir, where political unrest and resistance to Indian rule are prevalent, the UAPA has been used to target activists, journalists,political leaders and businessmen. The law’s application has contributed to a climate of fear, where individuals are detained for years without trial, and the judicial process is often bypassed in the name of national security.
Prolonged Detentions and the Absence of Fair Trials
The UAPA has facilitated prolonged detentions without trial, violating fundamental human rights principles, including the right to a fair trial as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In Kashmir, this has led to the incarceration of numerous individuals, including, Shabir Ahmed Shah, Massrat Alam Butt, Nayeem Ahmed Khan, Aysia Andrabi, Nahida Nasreen Fahmida Sufi and scores of others, often without formal charges or access to legal recourse.
Case of Khurram Parvez
Khurram Parvez, a prominent human rights activist and chairperson of the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), was arrested in November 2021 under UAPA. Accused of engaging in anti-national activities, Parvez has been detained without substantial evidence, despite widespread calls for his release. His case highlights the arbitrary nature of UAPA detentions and the lack of judicial integrity in Kashmir. Parvez’s prolonged detention not only undermines his rights but also sends a chilling message to other human rights activists and dissenters.
Case of Yasin Malik
Yasin Malik, a political leader and chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), was arrested in 2019 and charged under UAPA with conspiracy and funding terrorism. His trial has been marred by allegations of unfair treatment, lack of access to legal counsel, and an opaque judicial process. Malik’s case underscores the systemic issues within the Indian judicial system, particularly in relation to Kashmir, where political dissent is often equated with terrorism.
Judicial Decisions and the Erosion of Justice
The Indian judiciary’s handling of UAPA cases has been inconsistent and often disappointing. While the Supreme Court has occasionally emphasized the importance of due process, as seen in the case of Arup Bhuyan vs. State of Assam (2011), these rulings have had limited impact in Kashmir. The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has frequently upheld detentions under UAPA, citing national security concerns, even in the absence of concrete evidence.
For instance, in Khurram Parvez’s case, the High Court dismissed petitions for his release, prioritizing national security over individual rights. This raises serious concerns about the judiciary’s role as a check on executive power and its ability to uphold justice in a region marked by political strife and human rights violations.
International Law and Human Rights Obligations
India’s use of UAPA in Kashmir contravenes its obligations under international law, particularly the ICCPR, which mandates the right to a fair trial and prohibits arbitrary detention. The United Nations and various human rights organizations have repeatedly called on India to adhere to its international human rights obligations, emphasizing the need for transparency, accountability, and respect for individual rights.
The arbitrary detentions in Kashmir not only undermine the rule of law but also contribute to a broader narrative of impunity. The Indian government’s disregard for international human rights standards exacerbates the climate of fear and repression in the region, further complicating the already fraught political landscape.
Societal Impact and the Quest for Justice
The prolonged detentions under UAPA have far-reaching implications for Kashmiri society. Families are torn apart, communities are silenced, and the psychological toll on detainees is profound. The lack of accountability for human rights violations perpetuates a cycle of violence and resistance, further destabilizing the region.
The denial of justice not only affects individuals but also erodes trust in the judicial system and democratic institutions. The psychological trauma experienced by detainees and their families, coupled with the pervasive climate of fear, has long-term consequences for the social fabric of Kashmir.
Conclusion: The Urgent Need for Reform
The situation in Kashmir underscores the urgent need for reform in the application of security laws like the UAPA. The arbitrary detentions and denial of fair trials represent a systemic assault on justice, human rights, and democratic principles. As the international community continues to scrutinize India’s human rights practices, the Indian government must reassess its approach to security and dissent in Kashmir.
To restore faith in the judicial system and uphold the rule of law, it is imperative to ensure that individuals are afforded their right to a fair trial and that arbitrary detentions are curtailed. The path to justice in Kashmir requires a commitment to human rights, accountability, and transparency. The lives of countless individuals, including Khurram Parvez and Yasin Malik, depend on the restoration of these fundamental rights. The international community must continue to advocate for justice in Kashmir, holding India accountable to its international obligations and supporting the quest for a just and democratic society.
Writer is Chairman of Islamabad based think Tank , Kashmir Institute of International Relations (KII) and can be reached at: [email protected]
X : @sultan1913
