Status of "Northern Areas"
Afzal A Shigri
Northern Areas comprises of five districts namely Gilgit, Ghizer, Diamer, Skardu and Ghanche. These were independent valleys ruled by the local Rajas or Mirs.
During the nineteenth century, these areas were subjugated by the Dogra rulers of Kashmir and were integrated in the State of Jammu and Kashmir......
....The people of this area, however, have continued to be treated unjustly.
Successive governments tried to address these issues but the ministers of Kashmir Affairs and Foreign Affairs have insisted on maintaining status quo. Their view is based on the fallacious argument that the area is disputed, therefore, nothing can be done to change their status as it is likely to adversely affect Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir issue. Since for the government in Pakistan this issue was never a priority, therefore, no one looked into the fundamental constitutional issues in its correct perspective. No one is prepared to even take note of the apparent conflicting arrangement for AJK, which in the context of Kashmir dispute has the same status as the Northern Areas.
The real reasons are the petty, selfish and short-term gains that accrue to the bureaucracy in Islamabad and the incompetence of the Foreign Office that has failed to examine this vital issue in its correct perceptive.
I am witness to this drama when the officers of Foreign Office tried to dissuade the then President General Zia-ul-Haq from allowing the representatives from the NA to sit in the assembly as observers. He however over ruled them and issued instructions to allow a representative from NA to sit as observes in the assembly. This however did not last long.
The demand for fundamental rights by the people was either suppressed or brushed aside as an irritant that did not call for any attention. Some residents of Northern Areas and al Jihad Trust, therefore, filed two constitutional petitions in the Supreme Court seeking relief in the year 1994. A five-member bench of the Supreme Court gave its landmark judgement in the case in CP 17/1994 on May 28. 1999. The relief sought by the petitioners was as follows.
"It is, therefore respectfully prayed that the Fundamental Rights under the constitution of Pakistan Article 184(3) be enforced keeping view the declaration of Human Rights, the constitutional status of the people of Northern Areas be declared and being citizen of Pakistan be given full participation in the Federation of Pakistan. The litigant public is given the right to appeal, review revision before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Provincial Government status be given."
The petition was filed because the people of Northern Areas considered themselves Pakistanis. Their only link to the State of Jammu and Kashmir is the forceful subjugation of the area by the Dogra ruler of Kashmir.
After liberation of the area and decision to join Pakistan of its own free will, this link was severed forever. The government of Pakistan contested the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and also opposed the grant of any rights to the people of this area. The stand taken by the Federation makes interesting reading and also brings out a typical bureaucratic point of view on this sensitive issue. These bureaucrats barring a few honourable exceptions have no vision and are not prepared to find any alternate solutions for a problem.
"— The Pakistan exercise de jure administration in the Northern Areas. Assuming though not conceding, this to be untenable, and then the doctrine of de-facto administration applies here.
That Since Pakistan is sovereign in the Northern Area and expends huge amounts for the betterment of the people and on lubricating vast administrative machinery (judiciary and executive), it also has the inalienable right to regulate such laws which may be deemed appropriate to earn revenues.
That there is no Constitutional or Legal obligation to extend the Northern Areas representation in Majlis-e-Shoora.
The institution of Northern Areas act as a de facto executive, a de facto judiciary and a de facto legislature. Therefore, their acts are valid.
The stance of the Federation reflects of total disdain for the aspirations of the people of the area to be treated as equal citizens of Pakistan that they had joined after throwing off the Maharaja’s yoke. This was an unfortunate and extremely irresponsible stand before the highest judicial forum in the country. The Supreme Court after detailed examination of all aspects of the case and after hearing the Federation decided that it had the jurisdiction to hear the case and issue directions to the Federation. The honourable court did not accept the grant of the status of Pakistani citizenship to the people of NA, but in view of the Constitutional provisions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which Pakistan is a signatory held that people of the NA be given the right of self rule and an independent judiciary that should enforce fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution. The Supreme Court also held that the existing administrative arrangement did not meet the minimum benchmark of being governed by a representative executive and an independent judiciary.
The Supreme Court, therefore, directed the Federation to take appropriate steps to:
"Ensure that the people of Northern Areas enjoy their above fundamental rights, namely, to be governed through their chosen representatives and to have access to justice through an independent judiciary inter alia for enforcement of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the Constitution."
Six months were given to execute these directives but these are yet to be implemented. However to appear to be doing something in pursuance of this historical decision the Federal Government made some peripheral amendments in Northern Areas Council. Legal Frame Work Order, 1994 and issued a Northern Areas Court of Appeals (Establishment) Order, 1999. These amendments and orders fall far short of the clear and specific direction of the honourable Supreme Court. There is an elected council and a leader of the house but the Chief Executive is the Minister for Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas. He neither belongs to the Northern Areas nor have the people of this area elected him.
The people of the NA, therefore, after the fateful day of 1st November, 1947 when they joined Pakistan continue to be deprived of their fundamental rights and even the judicial verdict has failed to move the government and the ministry continue to side step the issue and their stranglehold continues on the area.
Every one including all the government servants even for petty cases have to pay homage to the all-powerful ministry for routine decisions. While the NRB harps on devolution of authority to local government, it has no time for the NA and has not even considered this issue in the light of the judgement of the Supreme Court. I will not be surprised if NRB is not even aware of this decision. This antipathy has resulted in disillusionment and frustration and a small segment of population has started demanding for drastic changes in the existing arrangement. Overwhelming majority of the people of this area continue to be fiercely patriotic Pakistanis but continued denial of their rights can result in demand that may not be in their interest as well as of the country.
Excerpted from an article published in the News International -- courtesy of which it appears here.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Diamer-Basha Dam Royalty Issue
Published in The News
Diamer-Basha Dam royalty issue
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Afzal A Shigri
While addressing a public meeting in Gilgit on July 4, President Pervez Musharraf said that the Northern Areas (NA) would get royalty from the Diamer-Basha Dam. This historic statement puts to rest an issue of life and death for the NA. NWFP has been claiming royalty on the basis of doubtful interpretation of Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Pakistan. This claim was based on location of the hydroelectric station in the province. The interpretation completely overlooked the spirit of this constitutional provision that is primarily meant to compensate the area that is adversely affected by flooding of fields and villages that takes place when such a facility for storage of water is created. Despite agitation by the people of the NA no one was prepared to address this matter. During the earlier visits of the President and the Prime Minister to the site of the dam, this subject had been ignored, causing despair amongst the people of the NA.
The July 4 statement of the president on the just and lawful rights of the people of NA will be remembered with gratitude by the people of the region. There is, however, a genuine concern that despite this commitment, given the brutal political environment of Pakistan where the big fish devour the small fish, every effort will be made to stop the implementation of this decision.
Before the legal parameters are determined to safeguard the interests of the area that will bear the brunt of displacement and negative environmental effects, it is fitting to recall and reiterate the basis on which NA is claiming royalty. Their demand was based on the interpretation of the Constitution in its true spirit -- i.e. the benefit should accrue to the people who are affected by the construction of a dam. In this case, large areas of Chilas will be flooded, displacing thousands of people and causing unforeseen environmental changes. Secondly, hydro-electric station cannot mean only the powerhouse where the electricity is generated -- it must include the entire structures that are essential to produce electricity.
Thirdly, the areas of Harban, Shitial, Sazin and Jalkot, for that matter all Shina speaking population in the vicinity of Chilas, had been part of the Gilgit Agency (NA) till 1950 when these areas were incorporated in the Kohistan district of NWFP without any legal basis. This has been concluded by Prof. Ahmad Hassan Dani, an eminent historian in his book History of Northern Areas of Pakistan. His findings are based on Letter No. 381 of 1913 from Mr. S. M. Fraser, resident in Kashmir, to Lt.Col. Sir George Roose-Keppel, Chief Commissioner of Peshawar, and letter No. Y 103/27 dated January 12, 1928, from the resident in Kashmir to Col. C. P. Gunter, director of Frontier Circle, Survey of India. These officials have clearly stated that these areas were part of Gilgit Agency.
A further research from the archives of the federal government and NWFP will reveal the manner in which this rather unlawful annexation was done which is in conflict with the stated stand of the Foreign Office. There is, therefore, a case for re-demarcation of the boundaries and restoration of these areas to the NA. This will ensure that in future, NWFP will not lay any claim to the royalty of the dam. It will also help the Foreign Office in their much-trumpeted UN resolution of plebiscite by adding more voters for the plebiscite if the UN becomes effective enough to implement its resolutions.
Diamer-Basha Dam royalty issue
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Afzal A Shigri
While addressing a public meeting in Gilgit on July 4, President Pervez Musharraf said that the Northern Areas (NA) would get royalty from the Diamer-Basha Dam. This historic statement puts to rest an issue of life and death for the NA. NWFP has been claiming royalty on the basis of doubtful interpretation of Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Pakistan. This claim was based on location of the hydroelectric station in the province. The interpretation completely overlooked the spirit of this constitutional provision that is primarily meant to compensate the area that is adversely affected by flooding of fields and villages that takes place when such a facility for storage of water is created. Despite agitation by the people of the NA no one was prepared to address this matter. During the earlier visits of the President and the Prime Minister to the site of the dam, this subject had been ignored, causing despair amongst the people of the NA.
The July 4 statement of the president on the just and lawful rights of the people of NA will be remembered with gratitude by the people of the region. There is, however, a genuine concern that despite this commitment, given the brutal political environment of Pakistan where the big fish devour the small fish, every effort will be made to stop the implementation of this decision.
Before the legal parameters are determined to safeguard the interests of the area that will bear the brunt of displacement and negative environmental effects, it is fitting to recall and reiterate the basis on which NA is claiming royalty. Their demand was based on the interpretation of the Constitution in its true spirit -- i.e. the benefit should accrue to the people who are affected by the construction of a dam. In this case, large areas of Chilas will be flooded, displacing thousands of people and causing unforeseen environmental changes. Secondly, hydro-electric station cannot mean only the powerhouse where the electricity is generated -- it must include the entire structures that are essential to produce electricity.
Thirdly, the areas of Harban, Shitial, Sazin and Jalkot, for that matter all Shina speaking population in the vicinity of Chilas, had been part of the Gilgit Agency (NA) till 1950 when these areas were incorporated in the Kohistan district of NWFP without any legal basis. This has been concluded by Prof. Ahmad Hassan Dani, an eminent historian in his book History of Northern Areas of Pakistan. His findings are based on Letter No. 381 of 1913 from Mr. S. M. Fraser, resident in Kashmir, to Lt.Col. Sir George Roose-Keppel, Chief Commissioner of Peshawar, and letter No. Y 103/27 dated January 12, 1928, from the resident in Kashmir to Col. C. P. Gunter, director of Frontier Circle, Survey of India. These officials have clearly stated that these areas were part of Gilgit Agency.
A further research from the archives of the federal government and NWFP will reveal the manner in which this rather unlawful annexation was done which is in conflict with the stated stand of the Foreign Office. There is, therefore, a case for re-demarcation of the boundaries and restoration of these areas to the NA. This will ensure that in future, NWFP will not lay any claim to the royalty of the dam. It will also help the Foreign Office in their much-trumpeted UN resolution of plebiscite by adding more voters for the plebiscite if the UN becomes effective enough to implement its resolutions.
Giving Northern Areas Their Due Rights
Published in The News International Pakistan
August 2, 2007
Giving the Northern Areas their due rights
By Afzal A Shigri
In the recent weeks there has been a spate of statements on the constitutional issue of the Northern Areas in the local press at responsible political level.
In late April, the Northern Areas chief executive (who is also the federal minister for Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas Affairs) claimed progress in granting constitutional rights to the people of the Northern Areas. At around the same time, ruling party Senator Nisar Memon said that the region should be given a provincial status. In the first week of May, the same member of parliament reiterated this view, saying that the region would soon be given its due constitutional rights.
On May 11, the federal minister for the region said that the Northern Areas had a right to be represented in the national assembly and that he would use his influence to secure this representation for the area. On May 20, the minister quoted the prime minister as saying that the people of the region would soon hear very good news. These developments, reported in the regional newspapers, are very encouraging and one feels that something serious is in the offing.
Similar statements were made before the election to the Northern Areas Legislative Council (NALC) and Senator Memon announced a package on behalf of the president. The package included an increase in the strength of the NALC from 29 to 32 by adding three technocrats. It also made an amendment in the Local Government Ordinance to set aside one-third seats for women, the delegation of administrative and financial powers to the NA administration and a number of other concessions. However, given what the minister had been saying prior to this, these measures seemed quite disappointing, mainly because they failed to address the critical issue of constitutional rights of the people of the area.
It was meaningless, as it did not even implement the legally binding judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan that had clearly directed that the people of the area must be given self-rule through its representatives and an independent judiciary to protect the fundamental rights of the people. The elections to the NALC were held on October 12, 2004. The people of the Northern Areas expressed the rejection of the package as the PML-Q could only get seven seats out of the total of twenty-four but it managed to cobble up a majority through manipulation and buying the independent members with promise for appointment as advisers. These appointments were however made after more than two years of the elections.
The promises before the election of NALC were essentially a political ploy to secure seats in the council but the recent statements seem to have been triggered by two reports that have exposed the Government of Pakistan for its failure to deal with the NA fairly. One of these reports exclusively deals with the NA and has been prepared by International Crisis Group (ICG), an independent Brussels-based NGO engaged in high level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict through field-based analysis. The other one is a report by Baroness Nicholson drafted for the European Parliament on Kashmir. In this report the status of Gilgit and Baltistan has been discussed and it is referred to as a region where there is a "total absence of constitutional identity or civil rights". The other portions in this report were highly critical of both India and Pakistan in the way they had been dealing with the population of this disputed area and the report has become controversial. Pakistan's ambassador to Brussels wrote to the baroness saying that the Northern Areas were not part of Jammu and Kashmir state. The ambassador in his letter said that UN resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir "do not, in any manner, apply to any part of the Northern Areas" and also that "integration of the Northern Areas with Pakistan is also not prohibited". Whatever the fallout of this report, it is good news for the people of NA as they have been clamouring for grant of equal status with citizens of Pakistan with representation in the assemblies. It is a major departure from the officially stated position by the GOP at all forums including the Supreme Court.
The report by ICG covered the historical, constitutional, political and sectarian aspects in detail and has flagged the possible repercussion of continued denial of fundamental rights to the people of this area. While comparing the arrangements in Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) it states, "In stark contrast, it (Pakistan) administers the Northern Areas under Legal Framework Order (LFO) of 1994, an administrative instrument used to strengthen its hold over the region while denying its residents basic political and civil rights". Historically these areas became part of the Kashmir state through aggression, deceit and intrigue. The people of this area have no cultural, ethnic or lingual commonality with Kashmir. They never accepted their status as Kashmiris and when the opportunity was presented they revolted and joined Pakistan of their own free will after throwing away the yoke of the Dogra rule. From November 1, 1947, to November 16, 1947, Gilgit was an independent area and Baltistan was in revolt. Hunza and Nagar formally acceded to Pakistan. After a long and valiant struggle of almost one year the rest of the Northern Areas were liberated and became part of Pakistan. The government then drew up the controversial 1949 Karachi Pact with the leaders of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Under this plan, administrative control of the Northern Areas was handed over to the federal government - this was done without consulting the people of the region.
It could be argued that the AJK leaders bartered the rights of the people of the Northern Areas to safeguard their own political interests. This pact that had no legal or moral basis linked the fate of the people of Northern Areas with the Kashmir dispute and the region since then has remained in constitutional limbo. The people of the region have never accepted their status as subjects of Kashmir state as it will practically mean legitimising the aggression of the Dogra rulers. They are Pakistanis who have been denied their constitutional rights on the basis of a pact signed by someone who had nothing to do with this area.
There is no reason to deny constitutional rights to the people of this area just because no one wants to look into the issue in its correct perspective. The decision makers must remember that the people of the Northern Areas have always shown unstinting loyalty to Pakistan and have joined it after throwing out the Dogra rulers. The least that the GOP should do is to implement the judgment of the Supreme Court in letter and spirit instead of circumventing it through an LFO that negates the orders of the court.
This area has assumed immense importance in the recent past due to its location for providing an energy corridor for China, its tremendous potential for hydropower energy and mineral wealth. The continued ambiguity on its status will frustrate our efforts to develop it as an energy corridor or develop mega power projects.
Any meaningless decision that does not empower the elected representatives of the area and provides an independent judiciary will only backfire with destructive impact on the area. The patience of these committed Pakistanis should not be further tested as they seem to have reached their threshold of tolerance that has manifested itself in nationalist movements that can potentially disturb the existing untenable governance structures and there is a danger that the simmering discontent may turn into unpredictable developments to the detriment of the interest of the country and people of this area.
The writer is former inspector general of police. Email: skardu14@yahoo.com
August 2, 2007
Giving the Northern Areas their due rights
By Afzal A Shigri
In the recent weeks there has been a spate of statements on the constitutional issue of the Northern Areas in the local press at responsible political level.
In late April, the Northern Areas chief executive (who is also the federal minister for Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas Affairs) claimed progress in granting constitutional rights to the people of the Northern Areas. At around the same time, ruling party Senator Nisar Memon said that the region should be given a provincial status. In the first week of May, the same member of parliament reiterated this view, saying that the region would soon be given its due constitutional rights.
On May 11, the federal minister for the region said that the Northern Areas had a right to be represented in the national assembly and that he would use his influence to secure this representation for the area. On May 20, the minister quoted the prime minister as saying that the people of the region would soon hear very good news. These developments, reported in the regional newspapers, are very encouraging and one feels that something serious is in the offing.
Similar statements were made before the election to the Northern Areas Legislative Council (NALC) and Senator Memon announced a package on behalf of the president. The package included an increase in the strength of the NALC from 29 to 32 by adding three technocrats. It also made an amendment in the Local Government Ordinance to set aside one-third seats for women, the delegation of administrative and financial powers to the NA administration and a number of other concessions. However, given what the minister had been saying prior to this, these measures seemed quite disappointing, mainly because they failed to address the critical issue of constitutional rights of the people of the area.
It was meaningless, as it did not even implement the legally binding judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan that had clearly directed that the people of the area must be given self-rule through its representatives and an independent judiciary to protect the fundamental rights of the people. The elections to the NALC were held on October 12, 2004. The people of the Northern Areas expressed the rejection of the package as the PML-Q could only get seven seats out of the total of twenty-four but it managed to cobble up a majority through manipulation and buying the independent members with promise for appointment as advisers. These appointments were however made after more than two years of the elections.
The promises before the election of NALC were essentially a political ploy to secure seats in the council but the recent statements seem to have been triggered by two reports that have exposed the Government of Pakistan for its failure to deal with the NA fairly. One of these reports exclusively deals with the NA and has been prepared by International Crisis Group (ICG), an independent Brussels-based NGO engaged in high level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict through field-based analysis. The other one is a report by Baroness Nicholson drafted for the European Parliament on Kashmir. In this report the status of Gilgit and Baltistan has been discussed and it is referred to as a region where there is a "total absence of constitutional identity or civil rights". The other portions in this report were highly critical of both India and Pakistan in the way they had been dealing with the population of this disputed area and the report has become controversial. Pakistan's ambassador to Brussels wrote to the baroness saying that the Northern Areas were not part of Jammu and Kashmir state. The ambassador in his letter said that UN resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir "do not, in any manner, apply to any part of the Northern Areas" and also that "integration of the Northern Areas with Pakistan is also not prohibited". Whatever the fallout of this report, it is good news for the people of NA as they have been clamouring for grant of equal status with citizens of Pakistan with representation in the assemblies. It is a major departure from the officially stated position by the GOP at all forums including the Supreme Court.
The report by ICG covered the historical, constitutional, political and sectarian aspects in detail and has flagged the possible repercussion of continued denial of fundamental rights to the people of this area. While comparing the arrangements in Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) it states, "In stark contrast, it (Pakistan) administers the Northern Areas under Legal Framework Order (LFO) of 1994, an administrative instrument used to strengthen its hold over the region while denying its residents basic political and civil rights". Historically these areas became part of the Kashmir state through aggression, deceit and intrigue. The people of this area have no cultural, ethnic or lingual commonality with Kashmir. They never accepted their status as Kashmiris and when the opportunity was presented they revolted and joined Pakistan of their own free will after throwing away the yoke of the Dogra rule. From November 1, 1947, to November 16, 1947, Gilgit was an independent area and Baltistan was in revolt. Hunza and Nagar formally acceded to Pakistan. After a long and valiant struggle of almost one year the rest of the Northern Areas were liberated and became part of Pakistan. The government then drew up the controversial 1949 Karachi Pact with the leaders of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Under this plan, administrative control of the Northern Areas was handed over to the federal government - this was done without consulting the people of the region.
It could be argued that the AJK leaders bartered the rights of the people of the Northern Areas to safeguard their own political interests. This pact that had no legal or moral basis linked the fate of the people of Northern Areas with the Kashmir dispute and the region since then has remained in constitutional limbo. The people of the region have never accepted their status as subjects of Kashmir state as it will practically mean legitimising the aggression of the Dogra rulers. They are Pakistanis who have been denied their constitutional rights on the basis of a pact signed by someone who had nothing to do with this area.
There is no reason to deny constitutional rights to the people of this area just because no one wants to look into the issue in its correct perspective. The decision makers must remember that the people of the Northern Areas have always shown unstinting loyalty to Pakistan and have joined it after throwing out the Dogra rulers. The least that the GOP should do is to implement the judgment of the Supreme Court in letter and spirit instead of circumventing it through an LFO that negates the orders of the court.
This area has assumed immense importance in the recent past due to its location for providing an energy corridor for China, its tremendous potential for hydropower energy and mineral wealth. The continued ambiguity on its status will frustrate our efforts to develop it as an energy corridor or develop mega power projects.
Any meaningless decision that does not empower the elected representatives of the area and provides an independent judiciary will only backfire with destructive impact on the area. The patience of these committed Pakistanis should not be further tested as they seem to have reached their threshold of tolerance that has manifested itself in nationalist movements that can potentially disturb the existing untenable governance structures and there is a danger that the simmering discontent may turn into unpredictable developments to the detriment of the interest of the country and people of this area.
The writer is former inspector general of police. Email: skardu14@yahoo.com
Friday, May 9, 2008
Offical version on Northern Areas
Published in The News Pakistan
NAs not part of Kashmir, report author told
ISLAMABAD: While the controversy over Baroness Emma Nicholson’s report on Kashmir is yet to die down, for reasons known to the government, Pakistan’s Ambassador to Brussels Saeed Khalid has written to Nicholson asserting new claims over the whole of Northern Areas as these were not part of the Jammu and Kashmir state in 1947.As quickly as she received the letter, Nicholson informed the ambassador in a seven-page reply that she was unable to comment on the Pakistan government’s new position to the European Parliament. Interestingly, while this was the lead story in Thursday’s The Hindu newspaper, New Delhi has yet not reacted to Pakistan’s fresh claims. This has given rise to speculation that prior to Saeed Khalid’s writing the letter, there had been tactical understanding with New Delhi.The ambassador in his letter, according to the report, insisted that the UN resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir “do not, in any manner, apply to any part of the Northern Areas”. As such, he argues, “integration of the Northern Areas with Pakistan is also not prohibited” — a suggestion likely to irk not just India, but many politicians in the sensitive frontier region.“Pakistan’s claims mark a break with decades of established foreign policy. Although it ceded a small part of the region to China in 1963, Pakistan has historically been reluctant to formalise its de facto direct rule in the Northern Areas. Pakistani diplomats believed that India would use such an act to strengthen its case for institutionalising the status quo in Jammu and Kashmir,” comments The Hindu.Experts contacted by The Hindu also expressed surprise at Pakistan’s position. Navnita Chadha-Behera, a professor at New DelhiÃs Jamia Milia Islamia University and author of two books on the conflict, said she was “astounded by the new claims.” Intriguingly, Ambassador Khalid’s claims fly in the face of Pakistan’s own judicial position on the Northern Areas. In a judgment delivered in September, 1994, the Supreme Court held that while the Northern Areas are “not part of Azad Kashmir as defined in the Azad Kashmir Interim Constitution Act,” the region was indeed “part of Jammu and Kashmir state” as it existed before 1947. As a result of Pakistan’s ambiguous position on the Northern Areas, the region had neither elected assembly nor representation in the National Assembly until 1994. Only in 2000 did a Supreme Court judgment lead to the establishment of a body with powers to legislate even on local matters. However, the federal minister for Kashmir Affairs continues to be the chief executive of Northern Areas Legislative Council.
NAs not part of Kashmir, report author told
ISLAMABAD: While the controversy over Baroness Emma Nicholson’s report on Kashmir is yet to die down, for reasons known to the government, Pakistan’s Ambassador to Brussels Saeed Khalid has written to Nicholson asserting new claims over the whole of Northern Areas as these were not part of the Jammu and Kashmir state in 1947.As quickly as she received the letter, Nicholson informed the ambassador in a seven-page reply that she was unable to comment on the Pakistan government’s new position to the European Parliament. Interestingly, while this was the lead story in Thursday’s The Hindu newspaper, New Delhi has yet not reacted to Pakistan’s fresh claims. This has given rise to speculation that prior to Saeed Khalid’s writing the letter, there had been tactical understanding with New Delhi.The ambassador in his letter, according to the report, insisted that the UN resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir “do not, in any manner, apply to any part of the Northern Areas”. As such, he argues, “integration of the Northern Areas with Pakistan is also not prohibited” — a suggestion likely to irk not just India, but many politicians in the sensitive frontier region.“Pakistan’s claims mark a break with decades of established foreign policy. Although it ceded a small part of the region to China in 1963, Pakistan has historically been reluctant to formalise its de facto direct rule in the Northern Areas. Pakistani diplomats believed that India would use such an act to strengthen its case for institutionalising the status quo in Jammu and Kashmir,” comments The Hindu.Experts contacted by The Hindu also expressed surprise at Pakistan’s position. Navnita Chadha-Behera, a professor at New DelhiÃs Jamia Milia Islamia University and author of two books on the conflict, said she was “astounded by the new claims.” Intriguingly, Ambassador Khalid’s claims fly in the face of Pakistan’s own judicial position on the Northern Areas. In a judgment delivered in September, 1994, the Supreme Court held that while the Northern Areas are “not part of Azad Kashmir as defined in the Azad Kashmir Interim Constitution Act,” the region was indeed “part of Jammu and Kashmir state” as it existed before 1947. As a result of Pakistan’s ambiguous position on the Northern Areas, the region had neither elected assembly nor representation in the National Assembly until 1994. Only in 2000 did a Supreme Court judgment lead to the establishment of a body with powers to legislate even on local matters. However, the federal minister for Kashmir Affairs continues to be the chief executive of Northern Areas Legislative Council.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)