IIOJK Human Rights Crisis: Why the World Is Being Urged to Act?

India’s human rights issues in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir regions (IIOJK) have recently escalated, especially seven years after the August 5, 2019, rollback of the Article 370 provision of the Indian Constitution. The unilateral move is seen as essential for integration, development and security in New Delhi, but local activists and international human rights monitors remain on the record of a civil liberties environment that has been increasingly curtailed, political dissent suppressed, citizens detained, and so on. The current situation even brought in fresh appeals from Srinagar, making the situation of human rights in IIOJK once more truly in the spotlight.

This was the first historical constitutional change made in 2019 August. The amendments restored IIOJK to the Union Territories of India and gave it somewhat more autonomy in the past. However, the prime minister/union government of the Republic of India revoked these rights recently by cancelling the two constitutional provisions. In its immediate response, the government has tightened the rule of law meaning all communication, internet usage, movement and even mass detention of political leaders and activists. This shutdown came under international spotlight and was termed as one of the longest internet shutdowns in a democracy.

Rights organizations have called for greater civic and political freedom in the region consistently since then. Allegations of arbitrary detention, excessive force, freedom of expression and political participation have been documented by reports from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human rights, the Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International. Earlier the UN human rights office requested independent investigations in the region over alleged human rights violations, highlighting the importance of holding perpetrators to account and transparent monitoring. Despite their rejection by the Indian Government, these allegations have been with them ever since.

Nevertheless, in the years since 2019, things have worsened even more so for local rights activists in IIOJK, the group reports. They say there has been a growing trend of a security response against their dissent in the territory’s governance, characterized by raids, detentions, surveillance and legal action. Repeatedly reported pressure and intimidation by political workers, journalists, lawyers and civil society activists. This has caused a gap between the normality which is being promoted in India and lived reality by many on the ground, critics say.

Against this, questions of the scale of militarization have stayed a key issue in debate. According to a number of analysts, IIOJK remains one of the world’s most militarized areas. Civilian living continues to be affected by troop deployments, checkpoints, searches and movement restrictions throughout the area. This has not only impacted political freedoms, it has also had an impact on regular everyday activity such as attending school, finding a job, accessing healthcare, conducting business, and maintaining mental health, activists say. For many families, there is a daily feeling of uncertainty as the conflict impacts them outside of the political or headlines—they feel it is happening in their lives from day to day.

India has staunched its defence with citing the economic growth, development of infrastructures, greater number of tourists visiting IIOJK and improved security indicators. These are undertaken as signs of the area resuming its normal flow – investment measures, road linkages, and also the alleged revival of tourism. But critics place a different emphasis on the economic development and democratic rights and civil liberties. Many have stated that as infrastructure develops, issues of representation, political agency, due process, and freedom of expression need to be addressed.

One of the main criticisms levelled against the growth of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government is that they have been dealing with a “political issue” more through “administrative and security” than by “dialogue”. Human rights groups say that achieving a lasting peace can’t be won through state control or economic stimulators, but through justices, accountability, rights to law and people’s right to freely participate in making their own political future. These guarantees are necessary to ensure stability will not be a short-term, contentious solution if they don’t have them, they warn.

International aspect of the IIOJK issue also remains a considerable problem. Activists are more and more urging the United Nations, world human rights bodies and influential countries to step beyond talking the talk and do something about placing an action on the ground to examine, document and diplomatically monitor, and push back on civilian rights protections. Some say that if they don’t say anything, it condones prolonged curbs and undermines international human rights norms.

The heart of this debate is the people of IIOJK themselves, who experience decades of unresolved political conflict and competing national narratives and are constantly living under uncertainty. For local rights defenders and activists, however, it’s not about territorial politics and constitutional change – it’s about their lives. It is about dignity, justice, freedom of the people and the heightening of their voices. It is time and again, seven years after Article 370 was repealed, the question has arisen, that if there is any permanent peace in IIOJK without solving the issue of human rights which still capsulate the life of this territory?