AJK Unrest: Inside the Protests, Government Negotiations, and Crackdowns in Rawalakot

Khawaja Asif sits back and says, "I don't consider the people of Rawalpindi to be Kashmiris." Brother, who are you to judge? This current issue regarding the 12 seats started in 1974. These refugee seats have no connection to the Kashmir issue.

Yes, if there is any connection to the Kashmir issue, it is only as much as that of the Muzaffarabad Assembly. And as for how much of a connection the Muzaffarabad Assembly has, you probably know that better than I do. In 1949, Liaquat Ali Khan went to Trarkhel to address a public rally. There, Sardar Ibrahim delivered a speech.

Before speaking, he told the people, "Stand up!" and the people stood up. And then he said, "Sit down!" and the people sat down. Seeing all this, a quote is attributed to Liaquat Ali Khan: "These mountain people are so obedient; tomorrow they might turn against us and overrun us." The duration isn't very long.

After the agreement is reached, a call for protest is given from there. If you are demanding an airport, it won't be built in four to six months. It will take time. A while ago, it came to light that there is a seat in Rawalpindi.

When Mr. Javed Butt contested and won from there, it was learned for the first time that he was Kashmiri. You yourself mentioned that the former prime ministers of Kashmir came from these very seats. These people are legislating for a region where they do not even reside. Many of these issues—let the elections happen and let the incoming assembly solve them.

The main issue is that there are misconceptions. The demand should be made to the Kashmir Assembly, and protests should be directed at them. Protests shouldn't be directed against the State of Pakistan. If those protests were against the State of Pakistan, they would have marched towards Islamabad, not Muzaffarabad.

We cannot even imagine that a former president of Pakistan, or even an MNA or MPA, after serving in government, would live a life where they travel around jostled in public transport vans, the first president of AJK, the vehicle that was given to him... To start with, what is the real issue? What are these 12 seats, and where are they located? What do refugees have to do with it?

Why this sudden demand... since this has been going on for over 50 years? Why did it get so much hype in the past one or two years? In the current scenario, what happened on June 5th was that on May 30th, talks were held between the Government of Pakistan, the JAK, and the AJK government. Rana Sanaullah came out and said that the talks remained hopeful and there is no deadlock.

Things will become clear after another session or two. And he said that before that next session, an All-Parties Conference would take place. After this All-Parties Conference, on June 6th or 7th, since there was a call for June 9th, I think he said on June 7th or 8th that another session would be held, and hopefully things would be resolved somehow. After that, the problem was that on June 4th, a press release came out from the Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, stating in that release that all tourists in Azad Jammu and Kashmir should leave AJK by the evening of June 5th.

Election Schedule and Unrest

On June 5th during the day, the Election Commission announced the election schedule. In the evening, around 8–9 PM or 9–10 PM, a press release came out— sorry, a notification was issued declaring JAK to be proscribed. Then late at night, if you go from Rawalakot to Khaigala, which is another local market about 8 to 9 kilometers away, a JAK leader was coming from there towards Rawalakot, and his convoy was attacked and fired upon.

He himself was struck near the ear, a bullet grazing past his ear, and one of his companions died after being hit by bullets. Then he and the driver ran to save their lives. On June 6th, nothing major happened, but on the 7th, the minor who was shot on the night of the 5th, named Shahzaib Khabeeb—people were to offer his funeral prayer at the Rawalakot College Ground. The time was set for 7 PM, so people were naturally gathered in front of CMH all day, Shahzaib's body was at CMH and wasn't being handed over at first, and these issues were ongoing, so minor clashes were taking place, police were firing tear gas in places, and since people were staging a sit-in outside CMH, during this time, a major reason the funeral prayer couldn't be offered was that an FIR was issued by the state, charging Shahzaib Khabeeb under the Anti-Terrorism Act, so the people demanded at the time that terrorism charges against him be dropped, after which they would hold the funeral prayer and bury him.

Since then, that FIR was obviously not withdrawn, and no reaction came from the state regarding it, so late that night, a crackdown was launched against the sit-in. The first was around 9 PM, causing about three or four casualties on the spot, and shortly after, late at night around 1:00 or 1:30 AM, a second major crackdown dispersed the sit-in. When the 9 PM crackdown occurred and casualties happened, the bodies taken inside CMH were taken into custody by the forces and have still not been returned to the relatives.

The state's narrative was apparently that protesters attacked CMH, and these events unfolded when forces resisted the attack. Look, the state claimed and even showed some footage showing protesters entering CMH, but the main issue and question that arises is that CMH is an army area, so how did people enter while the army was present? For one... Just like they entered the Corps Commander House.

Your point is not invalid to be dismissed, but the core issue remains that regarding the footage and details brought forward by the state, the appearances of the people shown... Anyone who saw it and knew Rawalakot realized that these people in those appearances were not locals. So this was obviously something that shocked everyone, and then the state could not maintain this stance for very long either.

After that, a curfew was imposed in Rawalakot on the 7th itself. Yes, June 7th. Announcements were made—no official notification—but announcements were made from local mosques by the forces, and since the city was under their control. To sum it up, you are saying that until the first week of June, the state was... negotiating.

Rana Sanaullah said there was no deadlock and that they would resolve matters through an All-Parties Conference, but right after... The All-Parties Conference took place, but no further talks were held after that; instead, on the second day of the conference... JAK was declared a proscribed organization, following which shots were fired at the protest, resulting in one death, and immediately after, conflicting news about CMH came from both sides.

One side claimed an attack on CMH, while the other claimed they were attacked. Thus, the first two weeks of June passed. So far... No, after that on June 9th, a long march started from Mirpur. The long march started from Mirpur, and the marchers reached Rawalakot on the 10th.

Meanwhile, people from Palandri—the headquarters of Sudhanoti district—marched towards Rawalakot, because such a major tragedy had occurred in Rawalakot, and they were led by Sardar Rehman of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, while Khawaja Mehran, Imtiaz Aslam, and others led those coming from Mirpur. And are all these nationalist parties? No, Rehman belongs to a nationalist party while the others are JAK.

I don't know much about Mehran's background, but looking at Mehran's past statements, I never felt he was a nationalist. This stance of his that was observed and heavily propagandized was based on two or three speeches he delivered during the recent sit-in, even though three to four thousand speeches were delivered from that stage. Taking just three speeches to run propaganda and label an entire movement...

Anyway, we can discuss that too, but on June 10th, people from Mirpur and Palandri gathered at Draik Eidgah in Rawalakot, and a sit-in began there. This sit-in was also cracked down upon two or three times; a major crackdown happened on June 14th, and there were casualties then as well. After that, another crackdown took place two or three weeks later, or a week or two later, so three or four major crackdowns have occurred so far with casualties, and after that, on July 15th, they announced a long march again, announced another long march.

Negotiations Through OPF Mediation

Then on July 15th, it was announced from the JAK stage that negotiations were ongoing through the mediation of the OPF Chairman. And that letter—which they claim was received from the Field Marshal—also arrived on July 15th, but meanwhile the state responded that no such letter had been written by the CDF. No, the letter wasn't written by the CDF; it was written by JAK to the CDF.

No, after that it was also claimed that the CDF had written a letter too, right? JAK claimed that in response, the CDF appointed the OPF Chairman as mediator and sent him to negotiate, but the OPF Chairman stated that these were his own personal efforts and he wasn't acting on anyone's behalf. So JAK then stated negotiations were underway, and therefore extended the sit-in until the 22nd.

Then on the 22nd, similar talks took place, and they stated that matters had been almost finalized with them, But a written agreement is not happening, and until a written agreement is signed, we will consider that no talks have taken place. But since these faces are not present here in front of us, who were the people from the JAK side negotiating with? Because on the state's side, the stance was that there would be no negotiations, that this is a proscribed organization, and no talks of any kind would be held with them, etc., such things were coming from the State of Pakistan.

They clarified that the Chairman of the OPF was negotiating on behalf of the state. Now this was what JAK claimed, while the Chairman was saying, "I am acting on my own behalf, trying to convince the state of certain things and them of certain things as well." Could you explain OPF briefly? Overseas Pakistanis Foundation.

And who is handling it? What is their background? The chairman is presumably a UK-based businessman, and... this initiative was taken by the Jammu and Kashmir diaspora. Then obviously, on the 25th, when negotiations did not succeed, and no written guarantee was given to the JAK, they announced that people should march from Mirpur on the 26th, reach Rawalakot on the 27th, and then move from Rawalakot towards Muzaffarabad.

And polling was scheduled to take place in Mirpur on the 27th. On the evening of the 26th or sometime on the night of the 27th, they reached Rawalakot. Then, when they were about to move forward near Rawalakot city, near the Chinar Guest House, the first crackdown began, because forces were present there while they were moving; this was roughly 3 kilometers from the sit-in site.

Then clashes broke out and firing took place. JAK claims that the firing was completely unprovoked and unilateral. Meanwhile, the state's narrative is that the protesters fired first. Speaking to the BBC, the IG said that until an autopsy report or hospital confirmation is provided, they cannot take ownership of it, as official figures must come from there.

In the agreement reached in October 2025, the demands that were fulfilled were that FIRs against you were canceled through a notification, you received compensation, and the families of those who died or were injured were compensated. Those arrested under the MPO were released. The size of the cabinet was downsized, and the number of secretaries was reduced. And the health card was restored for a short time, but then again... those health card facilities were withdrawn.

Apart from these 5 or 6 items listed, no other demand in the agreement signed with them was implemented. But Danish, I want to understand this because the timeframe between the agreement and the call for protest wasn't very long. If you are demanding an airport, it won't be built in four to six months; it takes time. Likewise, if you are talking about dialysis machines and so on, all these demands cannot be met overnight.

It takes time, right? So expecting all 32 demands to be fulfilled in just six or seven months is... You yourself listed the practical items that could be done immediately, like dropping the FIRs, which was done. The rest were bound to take time.

That is what I am addressing. Look, the state itself set a timeframe of three months for all these things, and in the agreement, it was clearly written that these things were to be fulfilled in three months, except for two issues for which committees were to be formed and discussions held. Even in the dialogue that took place on May 30, it was said that the feasibility report regarding the airport showed it was not feasible.

So JAK demanded to know which firm prepared that feasibility report, who conducted the survey, and all the details. They had no written document, but verbally claimed that it was not possible. However, three or four weeks later, when Maryam Nawaz went to campaign in Mirpur, she told the people of Mirpur... she said, "I will give you the gift of an airport." So when the airport is deemed infeasible during talks with the JAC, yet a politician goes there and claims otherwise, I think that gives food for thought.

Impact of Neelum-Jhelum Dam

The second issue was regarding environmental impacts, which is not a recent matter. That issue dates back to when the Neelum-Jhelum Dam was being constructed. At that time, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) clearly specified that specific measures must be taken to mitigate the climate impacts. These included artificial lakes as well as recommending a large number of trees to be planted in a certain manner.

Because when the Neelum-Jhelum Dam was built, it severely damaged the environment of Muzaffarabad, raising the temperature by up to three degrees, and obviously, it is no minor matter to divert a river away from a city through a tunnel and then fail to mitigate its environmental impacts. And this demand wasn't new; in 2019, in the High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, a writ petition was filed, and in response to that petition, when the High Court issued its ruling, it clearly stated that to address these issues, agreements regarding hydel projects in Azad Jammu and Kashmir must be made between Muzaffarabad and Islamabad before proceeding further.

So the fundamental demand was for implementation, which was included in the charter. Apart from that, you mentioned MRI and ECG machines, for which a budget of 5 billion was required, and at that time, a three-month timeframe was agreed upon with them, stating that funds would be provided to the AJK government to install them. However, within those three months, no discussion took place regarding this.

Partial implementation occurred in Pakistan's latest budget. It was arranged so that the budget allocated these installations over five years, with 940 million allocated for this year. Similarly, the improvements needed for the electricity infrastructure were part of a 10 billion project, which the government assured at that time would be carried out within three months. Though no talks occurred on this, in the current budget it was spread across various phases over 10 years; according to the budget document, it remains unapproved, yet initial discussion was started on it.

Regarding a small tunnel funded by the Saudi government, which was approximately 1.5 to 1.75 kilometers long, the government diverted those funds elsewhere, and the demand was to spend those funds where originally intended. There were other minor developmental issues like this, which were not major obstacles on their own, but when none of these promises were fulfilled, it led to this situation.

The three months were completed on January 4th. After January 4, JAC held meetings with them, followed by another meeting toward the end of February. When no progress was being made on any of these matters, JAC announced at the end of February that they would conduct a long march on June 9 if no further developments took place regarding their accepted demands. Talks continued intermittently, but in the end, you saw what the outcome was.

You have been living in Rawalpindi-Islamabad for a long time; for example, there were reports from the children's ward in Rawalpindi that rats were biting children there. Now, to resolve that, an entire organization doesn't just get up and attack GHQ nearby or start protesting there; it has to be sorted out administratively, because it's an administrative issue. The Sindh Canal issue arose recently; people protested, and it was eventually sorted out.

It was sorted out. Emissions are a global issue; Pakistan claims that global emissions affect Pakistan, and while Pakistan has a strong military, it doesn't launch attacks over it; we try to resolve it through dialogue. Things are sorted out through negotiations. Currently, what is apparent is that you understand better than I do that three or four months is not a long time to resolve any major issue; it takes time.

Considering that what the State of Pakistan mostly states is that for many issues, let elections take place and let the new assembly solve them. It is also their right to resolve them. Across Pakistan—you live in Islamabad, you know how many water issues exist here. You and I have been facing all kinds of problems across Pakistan since childhood.

So the solution isn't to... there are still memes about Karachi, like University Road being under construction forever and still incomplete. Every city in Pakistan has problems, and these are administrative problems. The issues you highlighted as well, setting aside the 12-seat issue, are mostly administrative issues. It will take time.

Do you think it is justified that as a result of this, you start leading a movement of this kind, which, as you know, India is manipulating heavily, and considering the kind of slogans being raised from there? I am not saying that the State of Pakistan has done Kashmir any favors, but the State of Pakistan... Within Pakistan, there are many circles criticizing that the subsidies given over there should also be provided to us, saying, "We get no subsidies, and you are cutting into our livelihood to subsidize Kashmiris."

But even with them, things are sorted out, discussions take place, so the state has always accommodated Kashmir to some extent in the past, so it will likely want to do so in the future as well, because Kashmir is a very sensitive region. As you know, the international media will immediately pounce on it, report on it, and India will manipulate it, so don't you think the state is making an effort on its end, with no bad intentions behind it?

It is just mismanagement, which exists in every city of Pakistan; it isn't unique to Kashmir itself. Sir, look, you mentioned the word "attack," but in my view, no attack was launched anywhere. Protests, yes—if you call it a protest, that is justified. Now, the issue is that protesting for your demands is a right granted to everyone by the Constitution of Pakistan.

And if any violation was committed by the JAC in this regard, it should certainly be pointed out, but we see that they had called for a protest on June 9th, so what happened on June 5th that one of their leaders... faced an assassination attempt, and one of their members was assassinated, and the JAC was declared a banned organization? Why did all these things happen on June 5th then?

Is what is happening with the JAC or inside Kashmir right now happening only there? Haven't two other political parties been banned in Pakistan over the last three years? Were the elections not manipulated against them as well? So this isn't just Kashmir...

My objection is only to portraying this as a conflict between the State of Pakistan and the State of Kashmir, because this issue belongs to all of Pakistan, from Kashmir to Karachi. No sensible person sees it that way; this is a creation of Pakistan's mainstream media, and even in mainstream media, it is driven only by those belonging to Central Punjab and those from the areas along the GT Road heading north from Central Punjab.

Has any anchor from Karachi said such a thing? They might have written columns presenting the state's narrative, but did they ever engage in propaganda? Shahzeb Khanzada hosts programs, as do Kamran Khan and countless others. Why did Ansar Abbasi spread such propaganda?

He did it, and Khawaja Asif sits with him saying, "I don't consider people from Rawalpindi as Kashmiris." Brother, who are you to decide? The real issue is a mindset problem. Has any Pashtun ever labeled a Kashmiri a traitor, or has a Baloch or Sindhi ever called them traitors?

Why does this always come from Central Punjab—that you declare Kashmiris traitors, people from KPK traitors, and Balochs traitors, and if anyone opposes the Kalabagh Dam, you declare Sindhis traitors too? The real matter is... I disagree with this point because in Central Punjab, along that belt, there are politicians currently facing treason charges sitting in prison—they are also from Central Punjab, aren't they?

So it is not about one district versus other provinces; it is more about the state versus voices that dissent from the state's narrative. It has nothing to do with provincialism. Sir, let me tell you. Nawaz Sharif or the politicians you are referring to from Central Punjab— look at all the things they said against that major institution, yet they were brought back and placed right into those seats again.

If anyone anywhere else made similar remarks, did they get back the same space they held five years earlier? But Sardar Ibrahim was given that space too, right? Sardar Ibrahim spoke against the state, and later he was made President again, so both sides show the same balance. Sardar Ibrahim never spoke against the state.

History of Poonch Uprising

What about your Poonch uprising in the 1950s? That was about one person, one vote. Sardar Ibrahim never... That was an armed struggle, wasn't it?

He never spoke against the state. What happened in that instance too? Let me give you the background on that as well. In 1950, Sardar Ibrahim was removed from the presidency.

Look at the events before that, and you will see a lot of resemblance to this movement. It is great that you brought this up. What happened was that Sardar Ibrahim was sent to the UN Security Council to present the case, but since Gandhi was assassinated then, no further talks could happen, and that meeting was adjourned. After that, Sardar Ibrahim visited Europe and the United States, receiving a lot of recognition.

These are things written by Sardar Ibrahim in his own book, "The Kashmir Saga," which I am recounting. When he returned to Pakistan, he stated that he received immense acclaim. In the meantime, Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas had been released from Jammu and had come to Pakistan, and he was appointed as the Supreme Head of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir government, meaning a position superior to the President.

In 1949, Liaquat Ali Khan went to hold a public rally in Trarkhel, where Sardar Ibrahim delivered a speech. Before speaking, he told the crowd, "People, stand up." The people stood up, as it was customary back then to sit on the ground since chairs weren't widely available. Then he said, "People, sit down," and they sat down.

Seeing all this, a quote is attributed to Liaquat Ali Khan by many writers and observers: "If these mountain people are so obedient, tomorrow they could march against us." Did Liaquat Ali Khan say this at that rally? After that rally, many people in Pindi, including Sanaullah Butt and others, quoted this remark. And Sardar Ibrahim's nephew, Sardar Saleem, who was a member of Pakistan's first Senate, also quoted this sentence when I interviewed him for my book.

In 1950, Sardar Ibrahim was removed, sparking protests in Poonch over why the president was removed. Was this after the Karachi Agreement? The Karachi Agreement was signed in April 1949. So after that... could you quickly brief the audience on what the 1949 Karachi Agreement was?

The Karachi Agreement was essentially the first set of rules of business given to AJK by the Government of Pakistan. Under it, almost all matters of AJK were retained by the Government of Pakistan. The biggest aspect was that Gilgit-Baltistan was claimed as part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, but no unified political setup was established between it and Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

The FCR was enforced there, despite a government having emerged through a political movement. Furthermore, all of our administrative powers, whether regarding refugees or administrative affairs, were handed over to the Government of Pakistan and the Minister for Kashmir Affairs—who was a minister without portfolio back then— handed over to them. A Ministry of Kashmir Affairs was created?

Yes, the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs was established later. At that time, secretaries had the power that if they disliked any law, they would write to the Chief Secretary, who could amend that law at his discretion. So effectively, the entire authority of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir government was handed over to a Chief Secretary under this Karachi Agreement. And was Sardar Ibrahim in disagreement with this agreement?

Actually, it is mostly verbal traditions suggesting he disagreed; while there are many speeches of Sardar Ibrahim, he never officially expressed disagreement, and since his signature is present on the Karachi Agreement, his legacy—meaning his son Khalid Ibrahim—fully owned the Karachi Agreement, and his grandson, who is currently an assembly member, also fully owns this agreement, so the family—meaning his legacy—owns it.

When he was removed in 1950... what was the reason for his removal? What was the state's reason? The state had no clear reason; they simply removed the president, and since the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir was appointed at that time by the executive council of the Muslim Conference, the president was removed first, and approval from the executive council was obtained afterward.

When he was removed back then, unrest broke out in Poonch, and in fact across all of AJK, and the Pakistan Army's very first internal operation took place in Poonch, in Rawalakot. For context for our audience, could you explain that the Sudhan tribe and this Poonch region had about 8,000 to 10,000 World War II veterans settled there? They were trained military men equipped with World War II weapons, which is why this area frequently witnessed uprisings, as they had received military training from the British.

It was always declared a martial area by the British Army, and that was the reason that when the 1947 movement started, the armed struggle within the State of Jammu and Kashmir began right there in Poonch, forcing the Maharaja's forces to retreat. Towards Muzaffarabad and Mirpur, it was mostly tribesmen who came from Pakistan... Intervened as tribal fighters. They went there, but the indigenous movement in Poonch— whether considered armed resistance or a political movement— originated in Poonch in both cases, and Sardar Ibrahim, Captain Hussain Khan, Colonel Khan Muhammad Khan, and all these key figures belonged to the Sudhan tribe, along with some people from Bagh; but the armed movement against the Maharaja's forces started from right here.

And when the Maharaja visited, when Colonel Khan Muhammad Khan brought him forward, forty thousand men stood ready to present a guard of honor, all dressed in their old military uniforms. Terrified by the sight, he did not take a proper salute and returned to Srinagar. Once Sardar Ibrahim was removed from the presidency in 1950, who replaced him after that? Mirwaiz Yousuf Shah took his place, followed by Colonel Ali Ahmad Khan, then Mirwaiz again, followed by Colonel Sher Ahmad Khan— all of this happening in the 1950s.

Yes, this was from 1950 through 1957, and after Colonel Sher Ahmad Khan, once again when Yousuf Shah returned, serving a six-month tenure, Sardar Abdul Qayyum came at the end of 1955, serving for about seven or eight months in 1956. When did Sardar Ibrahim become President again? He became President in 1957, and even then, it was not through a vote, and their demand was still not met.

But I have obviously always questioned this matter... When they were demanding "one person, one vote", and after six years of agitation, becoming president through nomination again obviously raised a major question. So things like this happened, and after that, Ayub Khan imposed martial law and removed him. He removed him and appointed K.

Khurshid Hasan Khurshid Background

H. Khurshid as President. Khurshid Hasan Khurshid. Khurshid Hasan Khurshid himself is a very interesting character. His background— I obviously might not be able to explain it that well to the audience, so could you quickly share a profile of who Khurshid Hasan Khurshid was?

Khurshid Hasan Khurshid was the secretary to the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and I think I read somewhere a quote attributed to Jinnah— I don't know if it's truly attributed to him, I'm not certain— that "My secretary did more work towards creating Pakistan than I did." So that was Khurshid Hasan Khurshid. And obviously, after 1947, he came to Pakistan and mostly settled here in Lahore.

He was also quite close to Fatima Jinnah. Yes, during Fatima Jinnah's presidential campaign against Ayub Khan, he stood with Fatima Jinnah, even though Ayub had made him president. Later, when the BD elections took place in the 1960s, he was once again elected President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. But his demands were very interesting.

His demand was that the Muzaffarabad Assembly should be made a representative assembly for the State of Jammu and Kashmir, gaining international recognition. Just as Palestine holds observer status at the UN, his thinking was almost the same, that this should happen. And this demand was even supported by Pakistan at the time. Pakistan's Foreign Minister at the time, Manzur Qadir, supported it too, and Ayub Khan supported it as well.

There are many statements from Ayub Khan on this, but this demand could never be implemented. Then his conflict with Ayub Khan arose when, during the construction of the Mangla Dam, the issue of resettling the people became a core dispute. Another dispute arose when Sheikh Abdullah visited Pakistan, and he and K. H. Khurshid traveled together from Islamabad to Muzaffarabad.

Whatever conversation took place during that time, when a report on it was given to the state—to the Pakistani establishment— an environment was created that led to K. H. Khurshid being removed. What was so controversial about that conversation? That's what was said.

The report claimed they were speaking in Kashmiri and discussing making Kashmir independent. Were they given the same old label of treason that's always been used? The same label that is being placed on activists today. So he was kept detained at Dalai Camp—a place called Dalai in Muzaffarabad— he was held in custody at Dalai Camp for six months.

And before that, in '47, wasn't he also imprisoned in India, in Srinagar, when he went to visit on the Quaid-e-Azam's orders? He was originally from Srinagar as well. Yes, he was originally from Kashmir, a Kashmiri speaker. And his family always remained settled here in Lahore.

Actually, his wife was also quite famous, Surayya Khurshid. I've read interviews of Surayya Khurshid. Yes, I've read her interviews, and some books that were compiled were put together by his wife herself. What I found very interesting is that in Pakistan, whoever holds key positions, even after retiring or stepping away from politics, leads a lavish lifestyle.

Could you share what his lifestyle was like post-1970s? It was not a lavish lifestyle at all. Even people who interviewed Surayya Khurshid— I mean, she passed away two or three years ago. Those people mentioned that she was still living in a three-room house in Lahore.

So it wasn't a lavish lifestyle at all. And when he passed away, it was in a public transport accident, and it is said that only a very small amount of money was found in his pocket— perhaps less than a hundred rupees, around 50 or 70 rupees was found in his pocket. So he never enjoyed that kind of status. I was thinking the same, that we can't even imagine a former president of Pakistan, or even an MNA or MPA, after being part of the government, living a life where he travels by getting pushed around in public transport vans, and then dies in such a place.

What's very interesting is that the first President of AJK— the car given to him used to be parked at Panjar, a place about 15–20 kilometers from Kahuta, because there was no road further ahead. So he would travel ahead on horseback, or on foot, or however possible, to our first capital, Janjal Hill or Trarkhel, and then return to Panjar to get back into the car. So the presidents of Azad Jammu and Kashmir lived simply like this.

Mangla Dam and Migration

Then, back in the 1950s, agitation started in Mirpur regarding the Mangla Dam. One thing I could never understand is that almost 100,000 people were displaced due to the Mangla Dam, and the Government of Pakistan secured an agreement with the UK under which one person from each household affected by the Mangla Dam would be settled in the UK. Is this true? No, that's not true.

Before that, the Tarbela Dam was built. How many people affected by the Tarbela Dam are abroad? Have you ever heard of any? The real issue is that these are misconceptions.

This Mirpur matter started much earlier, around the 1880s. These people's occupation had always been related to water; they used to transport goods via the Jhelum and Ravi rivers, working in cargo transport and carrying items down to the sea. The Lahore Port, which we heard named during Operation Bunyan-um-Marsoos, that Lahore Port actually existed once, and from there, via boat...

Although it wasn't a seaport, it was a river port—the Indians called it a seaport. Yes, so I am not referring to the port mentioned by the Indians, but I'm talking about the port that existed in the subcontinent before the railway system arrived. So those people were associated with it, and through it, they transported goods to the sea and occasionally traveled themselves, though that travel was minimal.

When the railways came along and boating ended, people needed new livelihoods. The hardworking people of Mirpur started working in the boiler rooms of British ships traveling worldwide to deliver cargo. "Sarang"—meaning, they shoveled coal into the fuel-supplying engines at temperatures of 55 to 60 degrees. They shoveled coal in that heat, and obviously, they got paid well for this work, so they did it gladly.

The first organized delegation that went for this work departed in 1894. And where did it go? It went to Birmingham. At that time, one person from that delegation even passed away.

And the first grave, the grave of the first Mirpuri in the UK, dates back to 1894. Since that time, these people have been going to Germany as well, they have gone to and lived in Australia, and they kept migrating to the UK as well. Australia didn't suit them in terms of climate, whereas the UK suited them, so they mostly stayed in the UK, and then in other nearby areas in Britain, so they have been settled there since then.

Otherwise, where else do you see such stable migration? Currently, there are 1.2 million of them over there. A population of 1.2 million is not small. Out of Pakistan's, presumably...

There are about 28 or 29 parliamentarians of Pakistani origin there, and out of those, 22 or 23 are from Mirpur. So, for such a stable community, once they started settling down there, they then began chain migration, bringing their cousins, brothers, and everyone. So because of this— Has this trend been going on since 1894? Yes, basically since 1880, but systematically since 1894.

Right, so what about the claim that due to the dam, over there... Because of the dam, only 300 individual vouchers were issued in total. 300. There was a gentleman named Chaudhry Al-Zaman, who demanded compensation from Ayub Khan, so at the request of the Government of Pakistan at that time, 300 individual vouchers were given, and 300 people left because of the Mirpur Dam. Otherwise, if hundreds of thousands of people had gone there back then, why would they have settled in Pakistan?

Then in today's charter of demands for the act, one demand is that the Mangla Dam affectees should be resettled, which means that demand would have been made to the UK government instead. Could you quickly cover 1974, when the constitution was introduced there and the assembly was formed, and what the role of the Azad Kashmir Council was at that time, from which it has now been stripped of its powers?

Well, the background to this was that when elections were held in the 1960s, when K. H. Khurshid became president, that process was not continued afterwards. When K. H. Khurshid was removed, fresh elections were not held; instead, a president was nominated again. An agitation was going on regarding all of this, during which an act was passed in 1964, and another act in 1968, and when a movement started in 1968, known as Ittehad-e-Salasa— that was a famous movement led by K.

H. Khurshid, Sardar Ibrahim, and Sardar Abdul Qayyum. And in its charter of demands, one key demand was that an assembly should be formed combining Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, and another demand was that this government should be recognized as the Government of the State of Jammu & Kashmir, and not just an administrative unit, along with many other such demands.

So as a result of that movement, the Act of 1970 came into being. The 1970 Act provided a presidential system. Since Pakistan had a presidential system earlier, AJK was also given a presidential system. Elections were held under it, and Sardar Abdul Qayyum became president in those elections.

K. H. Khurshid also contested the election, as did Sardar Ibrahim, but Sardar Qayyum was elected president and held the presidency for 5 years. The Act of '74 was basically an amendment to the Act of '70. By amending it, the system was converted from presidential to parliamentary, and an upper house was also included, which was called the Kashmir Council, and all legislative powers were held by the Kashmir Council, and the Prime Minister of Pakistan served as the chairman of the Kashmir Council.

So the situation was such that without the approval of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, no legislation of any kind could take place in Azad Jammu & Kashmir; constitutional amendments were a distant prospect—even ordinary legislation wasn't possible. I asked you to discuss '74 because I believe this current issue of the 12 seats started in 1974. What was the reason behind it? Because refugees had been present since '47, so why were these seats demanded specifically in '74?

Refugee Seats Controversy

Look, in the BD elections held in the 1960s, there were seats for refugees then as well—1,200 for refugees and 1,200 for Azad Jammu & Kashmir, it was 50-50 back then. But what was the situation back then? At that time, it was believed that a solution to this issue would be found under UN resolutions, which is why those arrangements were in place, and that was why a balance was maintained.

In the Act of 1970, seats were present as well, though fewer—probably four— and as for the Act of 1974, it did not explicitly specify those seats, rather, the Act of '74 mentioned the total number of assembly seats, but the refugee seats were governed according to the 1970 Election Act. And those were four? Those were four. Later, their number was increased because these seats were increased to 12 in the assembly in 1985.

But even that was under the Election Act; they didn't have direct constitutional protection back then either. They received constitutional protection in 2018. In 2018, when the PML-N government was ending, and PML-N was also in power in AJK, an amendment was made to the '74 Act, known as the 13th Amendment, and through that, they received constitutional protection. Could you explain roughly what is meant by constitutional protection?

Moving them from the Election Act... Instead, those seats were made part of the Act of '74 for the first time in 2018. And regarding their constitutional protection, the background is very interesting. That... Please continue, but under this same amendment, within the Kashmir Council, the powers held by the chairman, who happens to be the Prime Minister of Pakistan, were also stripped away.

No. The legislative powers were not taken away, but the financial powers— meaning all tax collection, as was previously done by the council— so the power of tax collection, which... all financial matters were taken from the council and given to the assembly. This had a positive impact, and obviously, our tax collected prior to 2018, compared to tax collection after 2018, shows a clear difference.

When this amendment was about to take place, at that time, against Farooq Haider, all of these 12 individuals turned against him. Because nine of them were from the Muslim League, having won elections on Muslim League tickets. At that time, a case was also pending in the AJK High Court regarding these seats. The petition argued that since they are not taxpayers of AJK, they should not have representation either.

So those people accused Farooq Haider, saying, "You are behind this writ petition." "So if you do not give us protection, we will attempt an in-house change against you, and a no-confidence motion will be filed against you." So at that time, Farooq Haider... since this amendment was being drafted, Farooq Haider asked the drafters, "What solution can be found for this entire matter?"

They said, "The solution is very simple: let's include them right here." So if in the Act of '74... When an amendment takes place, it cannot be challenged in any court, as this is a specific provision within Act 74 itself. So then this court... the petition will be dismissed and the issue will also be resolved.

So at that time, by making it part of Act 74, taking it out of the Election Act and incorporating it into Act 74, constitutional protection was granted to them and that case, which was a writ petition, got dismissed. Moving on to 1974, after 1974, until 1977, a parliament functioned, in which... the first prime minister in that assembly was also elected from these refugee seats.

The current assembly member, Majid Khan, his grandfather was Khan Abdul Hamid Khan, and the president was Sardar Ibrahim. That assembly continued until 1977, then martial law was imposed, and after that elections were finally held in 1985... Can you explain where these 12 seats are actually located? What is the voting procedure for them inside Pakistan, and where did these people originally come from?

Along with the obvious controversy that arose later regarding this. As for where these people came from, in 1947, from Jammu and the Kashmir Valley, they migrated to this side. Is there any estimate of how many people migrated? The figure cited from back then is around 300,000, well, around 275,000.

That was the number of migrants, but nobody has the exact actual figure, but during the 1960 or 1961 Basic Democracy elections, the number of registered voters was 118,000. Christopher Snedden wrote about this in his book, "The Untold Story of the People of Azad Jammu and Kashmir." So if the figure was 118,000 back then, then why did people lose so much interest that today it only grew from 118,000 to 400,000?

In my opinion, this number should have been much higher, and this... people were not engaged in that manner. Okay, where did all these people settle after arriving? Those who migrated from Jammu settled in Sialkot and Narowal, since those areas border Jammu, Sialkot, Narowal, Shakargarh, and some... also towards the Jhelum side, as well as various parts of Pakistan, including KPK, but those who migrated specifically from the Kashmir Valley, settled across various parts of Pakistan from there.

And that is why those who arrived from the Kashmir Valley have a designated seat in KPK as well, because Mansehra was nearby, so many settled there, and these people chose Pakistan over AJK simply because AJK was an underdeveloped region and for a very long time, there were virtually no prospects for development there, while those coming from Srinagar and surrounding areas, who were migrating, was not a very large migration; if we look at the current voters from the Valley, they currently number around 38,000, whereas those from Jammu, the registered voters, total over 400,000.

How do these elections actually work then? I mean... The mechanism for conducting these elections is that since our Election Commission has no jurisdiction there, it has no authority, so they... hand over the ballot papers and voter lists to the local administration or to the Election Commission of Pakistan, whichever procedure they lay down, whether the Election Commission of Pakistan handles it or the local administration.

Then in the evening, the ballot boxes and results are handed back to them. So the Election Commission of Azad Jammu and Kashmir has no oversight over who actually casts a vote and who does not. Look, take a regular constituency, say NA-52 for example, we know its defined boundaries and how many voters reside there and will vote. But when you talk about an entire province, are elections being held across the whole province?

Sir, we have a constituency that spans across three provinces. It covers parts of Punjab, Sindh, and even certain areas of Balochistan. So how... how are these elections managed? I mean, because prior to today, trust me, I have lived my entire life in this city, and I have never seen a campaign here for a Kashmir seat.

Look, regarding this... it was very interesting; global media actually reported on this once, and in that report, they highlighted that a polling station was set up for just two people in a certain place, and in several places, a whole polling station was established for merely three or four voters. That is the kind of situation it is. Obviously, voting is everyone's right and people should vote, but as for this vote's... we can discuss the legal consequences of this vote, but naturally, even if a polling station is set up for just one person, it serves as a good gesture.

And what about the people who contest elections for these 12 seats, are they actually Kashmiris? Sir, now... we only found out a while ago that there is a seat in Rawalpindi, from where a gentleman named Javed Butt contests and gets elected, and for the first time, it was discovered that he is Kashmiri, yet in his family, I think... nobody except him and his children actually held a State Subject certificate, in my opinion.

And... And it is also interesting that many of those who... Javed Butt himself claims that there are many fake voters. Majid Khan claims that there are many fake voters. So now... Well, Majid Khan's grandfather was in AJK, he obviously has a legacy, all of that, but there are many other people whose background is unknown, regarding when or how they became voters.

Now Javed Butt remains thankful to Sheikh Rasheed, so he came to prominence for the first time during the PTI era, so... how much credibility does he have? And then regarding the issue of issuing State Subject certificates, the Rehabilitation Department of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, its commissioner, to him if there is an affidavit with testimonies from two people, from two Kashmiris, then you get a State Subject certificate.

So when they file nomination papers, the basic... the basic requirement in it is that you must be a State Subject, and that's it? State... Exactly, and you become a State Subject with just two witnesses. Yes, that's right. So after that, what credibility is left?

The people who migrated back then, for them, in Pakistan's own Citizenship Act, there is a provision kept, and it was amended in 1970. It is Clause 14B, where it clearly states that the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir remain citizens of the State of Jammu and Kashmir until their future is decided, until they exercise their vote for a plebiscite, so when this is clear in the Pakistan Citizenship Act, then if a plebiscite for the Kashmir issue takes place or whatever happens, no one will ask them whether they are a voter in the AJK Assembly or not, or a voter in the Srinagar Assembly or not, or even a voter in the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly or not.

Their State Subject status will be checked, everything. So these refugee seats have nothing to do with the Kashmir issue. Yes, if they have any connection to the Kashmir issue, it's only as much as the Muzaffarabad Assembly has, and how much connection the Muzaffarabad Assembly has, you probably know better than I do. You yourself said that former prime ministers of Kashmir came from these very seats, right?

I understand up to this point, but besides that, Maqbool Bhat Sahib also contested the election from here, from this seat. So when you say there is no relevance, Maqbool Bhat Sahib, who is like a legendary figure in the Kashmir freedom movement, who was hanged inside Tihar Jail, how did he... In that way, K. H. Khurshid Sahib did so too.

I am not talking about their significance. Look, if this Assembly were relevant to the Kashmir issue, then it should have representation for refugees as well as representation for all regions, not just refugees, but Gilgit-Baltistan as well, Ladakh, Jammu... its own... this representation is not representation of Jammu and the Valley. This is only representation for those displaced persons who are settled in Pakistan.

This means it has no connection whatsoever with the Kashmir Valley or with Jammu. If this assembly had significance regarding the Kashmir issue, then the presence of Gilgit-Baltistan would also be necessary. Now, in Act 74, in the definitions provided in Article 2, the territory of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is defined as those areas liberated in 1947 through public resistance against the Maharaja's forces, and it includes those areas that will be liberated in the future.

Only those territories of Azad Jammu and Kashmir are mentioned. What geography does that form? From Bhimber to Neelum, meaning up to Taobat, and then on the Poonch side up to Haveli. That territory is defined, whose assembly is in Muzaffarabad.

Assembly Legislation and Governance

Now, the assembly sitting in Muzaffarabad has to pass laws there for governance, to manage all its affairs. When these refugee seats are added to it, they make up nearly 27 percent of this assembly, and 27 percent is very important for any legislation. As you know, standard legislation requires 51 percent, and for a two-thirds majority, this is obviously a significant number. So these people are making laws for the people of a region where they do not live, and their voters do not live there either.

They do not legislate for their voters, and they do not even legislate for themselves. The legislation enacted in AJK does not even apply to these members, because they are from those territories, they are not part of this territory at all. So the real issue is not that their significance regarding the Kashmir issue is fading away; rather, the real issue is that the political right of the people of this territory, their own right to make laws for themselves, is being taken away.

Secondly, regarding the Kashmir issue, how can a representative assembly be formed? Only when that assembly is granted the right in accordance with the Kashmir issue. Currently, the Kashmir issue is a matter handled by Pakistan's Foreign Office, The Kashmir issue is not just an issue for the people of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. No random person from AJK can just get up and speak about the Kashmir issue.

Even if you go to Geneva, to the Human Rights Commission or the Council, even for that, you need private NGOs, or you go on behalf of a Pakistani NGO. You do not go there on behalf of the government of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. In present-day Pakistan, refugees who have come to live from another territory fall mainly into two groups that form the majority. On one side are Afghan refugees, and on the other side are Kashmiri refugees.

Now, obviously Pakistan makes no claim whatsoever over Afghanistan, so they were only granted refugee status; obviously, you cannot grant them more ownership than that. The Kashmir issue, of course, is different. When your people come from there, you have to reassure them that they have ownership, that they are not living here under a refugee status. The issue is an international dispute and will be resolved one day, so having representation is fine...

It is not in our hands to go and conduct elections over there, so we give you representation here within Pakistan. So, in a way, ownership is being given, showing that you people are not a burden on Pakistan, you are not refugees, you have ownership in this country, and elections are held for you here— which I think the state views from this perspective. Considering this, still, if you people...

Obviously, among the present Kashmiris, there are objections regarding this. So the solution to this could only have been what your Supreme Court ruled there: that look, this should be a parliamentary issue, a legislative issue; bring a two-thirds majority and you can do this if you want, the Supreme Court cannot do anything about it, which makes sense. But then your perspective becomes understandable, that you can never get that two-thirds majority, because those very 12 seats are crucial for that two-thirds majority.

So then a legal solution to this issue cannot be found from either side? Look, one thing is, your last proposal was regarding NC-2, which was that they... the Jammu and Kashmir Council, which you also mentioned, whose chairman is still the Prime Minister of Pakistan, in that, give them representative... but they have no power. Look... Power... prior to the 13th Amendment in 2018...

There is no power after the 13th Amendment, but why do they need power? Positions are needed, right? You have to maintain the Kashmir issue. So the council's new position after the 13th Amendment is an advisory one.

In an advisory role, as per Act 74 of the Council, who it can advise is mentioned there: that it can also advise the Government of Pakistan regarding the Kashmir dispute. So they should be represented in it. Since they are connected to the Kashmir issue, they should be on a proper forum, from where they can advise the Government of Pakistan as well, saying, "Brother, the Kashmiri issue should be handled this way," and "Such developments are taking place there and these things should happen," giving them various proposals.

And that is a proper forum for them. Their representation won't be disrupted either, and they will get a proper forum. The second point you made, that they were given representation as a good gesture: look, space exists for them in the National Assembly as well, and space exists for them in every provincial assembly as well. Now, in 2022, local body elections were held in Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

So why weren't local body elections held for these seats? If these are part of that same territory, if these are necessary for that same territory, then elections should have been held on these seats too. No, the job of local bodies is to manage local administration, they don't have any local administration—what would they manage? Sir, the real issue is...

Look, that is the main point, right? That for a territory, another proposal for their representation was that legislative powers should be taken back from them, and they be made part of the assembly, just come, sit on those seats, and enjoy their status, without having legislative powers, and without receiving development funds. Now, development funds come from AJK's budget for these constituencies, so where is it spent?

Where does it go? How is it spent? This too hasn't been justified at all yet. That here...

I mean... When local bodies cannot function here, if no one can pave a street, or pave anything at all, then the question that arises at that point is: why should the development funds of Azad Jammu and Kashmir be spent here? It makes sense that it shouldn't happen here. Then, for a territory where they do not reside, how can they even legislate for it? Obviously, that doesn't make any sense either.

There were two proposals for them; one was that their legislative powers should be taken back, while letting them remain part of this assembly, and reducing their number. They would become symbolic. The second was that they be given representation in the council, so that they would have an advisory status. And so they can advise the Government of Pakistan regarding the Kashmir issue.

So despite both of these proposals being present, obviously no... But to understand both of these proposals, I... What will be the mechanism for its implementation? Will a bill be passed by the assembly?

From the assembly, obviously—all of this must go through the assembly. So all these demands should actually be made to the Kashmir Assembly, The protests should be directed at them, These demands should become part of the elections, Saying that "we will enter the assembly and pass this legislation," Protests should not be directed against the State of Pakistan. No, they are not actually directed against the State of Pakistan.

The demand being made of the State of Pakistan Is being made solely because The agreement that took place in 2024, Its signatory is the Federal Government. Ahsan Iqbal signed it, Rana Sanaullah signed it, Chaudhry Pervaiz Ashraf signed it, Qamar Zaman Kaira also signed it, So that demand is being directed to the State of Pakistan. If those protests were against the State of Pakistan, They would have marched toward Islamabad, Not toward Muzaffarabad.

That is obviously one aspect of it. Second, as for making that demand through elections, You yourself said that it is not being done simply because Once this representation is in place, Then it won't be possible for them to legislate on this. Their demand was that legislation should be enacted regarding these seats, Since both political parties that were signatories to this agreement Were a major part of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Assembly at that time, And still are, So those two political parties were asked "Since you signed the agreement, You should resolve this issue, And then we will participate in elections and proceed properly."

In the negotiations that the Awami Action Committee recently had With Qamar Raza, one point was also clearly Discussed: that these seats should be frozen, Elections for these seats should be put on hold, Electoral reforms should be introduced, and then we too will join the electoral process. Currently, of course, the Joint Action Committee Is not part of parliamentary politics.

So do the political parties in Kashmir that participate in parliamentary politics Align with the JAC, agreeing that its demands are valid? Or do they say, "No, these 12 seats should remain"? And by this, I mean both the opposition and the government? It's a very interesting situation: during the 2021 elections, PTI won these seats—9 seats.

In Punjab, PTI was in government, so PTI got them. So the former Prime Minister at the time— Farooq Haider, who was Prime Minister then— Said that these seats should be abolished, And promoted that entire narrative. Now they are advocating for these seats only because PML-N is in power in Punjab And they expect to win 9 seats from there. The Pakistan Peoples Party has always opposed these seats, Because PPP has no stronghold in Punjab, And they cannot win these seats.

Though it was Bhutto himself who first introduced them. The real issue is that Political parties are looking out only for their political advantage. They are ignoring the impact this has on The people of Azad Jammu and Kashmir; They are simply not paying attention to that. Moreover, there is another very interesting detail about these seats: Though it has now switched to open merit after the AJK High Court ruling, Until recently, There was a 19 percent job quota reserved for them in AJK government jobs.

Earlier, until 1990, it was 25 percent, But during the 1990 migration, when the 1990 refugees arrived, A 6 percent quota was allocated to them, And 19 percent was retained for the earlier group. Out of AJK jobs, where obviously Employment options are limited: you can either open a shop Or get a government job. So 19 percent of those jobs were allocated to them, And they also have A quota in the federal government, of course.

Furthermore, whichever province they reside in, They have a specific quota in that province as well, And yet they were also given a quota in AJK. Another demand from the public was That they should be relocated to the territory of AJK, Settled there, So that their representation remains intact, They pay taxes there, And naturally, when they contribute and become part of the local community, They will also care about its development.

But when an individual Goes to Muzaffarabad merely to complete their job posting, And after serving four, five, or six years Gets transferred back to Islamabad on deputation, They have no genuine stake in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Whether things are improving or worsening there, They have no personal interest in it. So naturally, there are many complications involved, Which is why these seats are opposed, And why this quota is opposed.

Before we conclude, Look, a state generally exhibits two types of behavior: One is aggressive: "If you challenge us, we will destroy you," "If you speak up, we will silence you," And the second is constructive: "Let's talk and resolve the issues." I usually pose a hypothetical scenario: For example, if the State appoints you as a representative, And the JAC also designates you as their representative, Saying, "We trust Danish, Whatever decision he makes or consultation he brings, It should simply result in a win-win outcome for both sides," Rather than one party winning and the other losing, Ensuring something positive for both, Because generally, a good agreement Is crafted with this very principle in mind, So that both parties are satisfied to some extent.

Resolving the Current Deadlock

What would you propose To resolve the current deadlock and ongoing protests, How can this issue be resolved, Considering a win-win scenario for both sides? Look, what I would suggest on this is, in my view, the JAC had already compromised on much more than this, but they were not being given all these things in writing. They were even ready to accept this proscribed status for about six months, but they wanted a written guarantee that okay, fine for up to six months, you won't let us hold talks or do all these things, but after six months, we should at least have the assurance that this status will be lifted from us, and we will be able to speak publicly, we will be able to talk to our people and address them.

So, verbally, all of this was promised to them, but it was not given to them in writing, which is what caused this entire issue. Then, on many issues, they were obviously even ready to approach the courts, all of that, but ultimately, the matter came back to the same point: that while they were being given a verbal guarantee, there was no written guarantee. I'm not talking about what was happening—what can you offer?

For both sides? I would at least offer them this: that their charter of demands will obviously be negotiated at the table, but... I would at least talk about restoring the status of June 4th, and under the June 4th status, obviously, they would get back the dead bodies, and under the MPO, and their people arrested under various acts would be released, the compensation amounts would be revoked, and... the proscribed status would be removed, so these, of course, would be the basic things.

These are obviously the things that the state has to give. What can the JAC offer? Things where you would ask the JAC to step back from for now? Look, as for the JAC, again, we need to find a win-win situation for both sides.

Look, if the state makes this offer to them, then the JAC should at least end the sit-in and come to the negotiating table. Why is the state... meaning, why is it acting as such a hard state? Or why is it taking such a stance? Because this issue might get resolved in the next six months, but the seeds of hatred being sown as a result of such incidents will persist for the next two generations, reminding them that back in June or July 2026, the state did this to us.

That hatred will linger for a very long time. So taking such an extreme... I just figure that the state must have some perspective, right? On the basis of which it is doing this—what are they thinking?

I don't understand what they are thinking, but... whatever behind-the-scenes negotiations were taking place, they... completely closed them. There was another issue with AJK. Before 2019, the people of AJK were always kept focused on the Kashmir issue. So before 2019, AJK never spoke up for its own rights.

Now when they came to demand their rights, then... they found out what happens when you demand your rights, which the rest of Pakistan has known for a very long time. There is a long history, starting from Ayub Khan to... in every era... Anyway, again, you understand the history of Kashmir much better. Personally, I felt very sad when I started understanding the history of Kashmir... that, man, we never even realized that while the history of Pakistan, Punjab, Sindh, and Balochistan is widely mentioned in our mainstream media and textbooks, including both the state's perspective and the opposition's perspective, the entire mention of Kashmir after '47 is missing.

It isn't taught what the Poonch Uprising was, nor is it explained what that legislation in '74 was. If both Mangla movements were talked about... So that should also be made part of the mainstream discourse; that was an attempt. Another thing—the objection raised against the three-rupee electricity unit rate, right?

Seeing all this, a quote is attributed to Liaquat Ali Khan: "These mountain people are so obedient; tomorrow they might turn against us and overrun us.

This was a verbal promise made in 1967 when Mangla Dam was completed. At that time, a verbal promise was made to the public of AJK. Then, when Mangla Dam was expanded in 2000 during Musharraf's era, the energy minister at that time—Salar something, probably... they signed an agreement with him, a formal written agreement, and that written agreement was finally made public in 2018.

And it mentioned that the people of Azad Jammu & Kashmir would be provided electricity at 2.59 rupees, since this territory is affected by Mangla Dam. So written promises were made back then, and they are being made now as well, but people in Pakistan are not even aware of this, about what promises were made or not made to the people there, or what the issues there are. In Punjab, development happens from Lahore.

In Punjab, just the administrative budget of Rawalpindi— which is used around the courts and by the forces— they use a budget of 29 billion. The salaries that come for teachers, for sanitary workers, at any level, those salaries obviously come from Lahore. Pensions come from Lahore; pensions are centralized. In the budget the AJK government receives, obviously it's not just... not just a development budget or an administrative budget, it includes pensions, all kinds of salaries, administrative expenses, and the development budget as well.

If Pakistan's foreign remittances are 40 billion dollars a year, out of that, people from AJK send 10 billion dollars—that's 10 percent. When a population of 4.5 million is giving you that, and a population of 250 million is giving you 90 percent, then spend that 10 percent on them to show real progress. Currently, there are 673 billion rupees in the banks of AJK, just in the bank branches located inside AJK.

The law that governs their lending activities— lending is not done within AJK; those funds are lent out in Pakistan instead, given to an investor in Islamabad or other places. So the main issue there is that until you resolve the employment issues— employment there is either government jobs or small shopkeeping. To set up an industry, you have to get approval from the Government of Pakistan, which obviously involves a lengthy process—first you get it from Muzaffarabad, and after that, their Interior Ministry writes to the center, and here you either get approval from SECP or the Interior Ministry, entangling people in a long bureaucratic mess.

Let me give you an example: in these elections, Nawaz Sharif said that... Look, you don't have health facilities, They tried to speak in Pahari, talking about what they call a village, from where you carry people down on a charpoy, and from there you take them to Pindi and other places... Now a former prime minister is saying this, and when the former prime minister gave a victory speech in Muzaffarabad... on July 22, 2016, he repeated all these points back then as well.

In that, he promised that we will provide you with two air ambulances, which would at least facilitate the people near the Line of Control. Nawaz Sharif himself now wants to become the prime minister of Kashmir, he even gave a speech there, though obviously it's not technically possible, but he is trying to step into the forefront to solve things, though that is a separate matter that he may no longer have the authority he once had.

You've discussed the PML-N, but what about the People's Party? Where does the People's Party stand? How much support do they have on the ground? Bilawal is speaking very aggressively regarding Kashmir, so can the People's Party play a role in steering out of the current crisis?

Let's discuss some of the People's Party's proposals, but your question about Nawaz Sharif was very interesting. Ever since the issue of refugee seats started being widely discussed in Pakistan, I've noticed that almost every other person had a grandmother, maternal grandmother, grandfather, or maternal grandfather who migrated. So I thought Nawaz Sharif could also bring forth a witness from somewhere to become a state subject, become the prime minister, or contest an election from some constituency, so perhaps that might have been possible.

Pre-poll rigging was also carried out in a very interesting manner, 12 green buses were provided from Punjab to Muzaffarabad. The Election Commission took no notice of it, even though the People's Party wrote a letter and... the Deputy Commissioner of Muzaffarabad said, "Look, these buses will remain parked until the Muzaffarabad elections, and will be operated afterward." And another very interesting aspect was that the official pages of Azad Jammu and Kashmir... government, like PID, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, DGPR, vacancies for drivers for these buses were advertised on their official pages.

So when a political party is giving buses, announcing them, and obviously this falls under... what do you call it, electoral rigging, and it is viewed as bribery. So at a time when the state's official pages, those representing the state, advertise these job vacancies, it clearly shows which direction you are trying to push things toward. Secondly, conducting the elections in phases is by no means an appropriate process.

The point is, for a population of 250 million, you hold elections in a single day— not just one, but two elections: both provincial and National Assembly. So why are you insisting on holding an election for 4.5 million people... in three phases? The National Assembly elections were postponed for a year, meaning the caretaker government served almost a year, or maybe slightly less.

So if there can be a one-year delay for the National and provincial assemblies, why couldn't you wait one, two, or three months in Azad Jammu and Kashmir? In Gilgit-Baltistan, we saw the election was delayed by about seven or eight months, where weather was used as an excuse; that was the emergency, right? So based on all these factors, it seems like someone is being stubborn here, and someone's stubborn demand is being fulfilled.

Then the results of the first phase—meaning PML-N got nine seats, and the People's Party got four—obviously, these will affect the second phase. In the second phase, elections are to be held for 24 seats, including 12 refugee seats... located in Pakistan and 12 in the Muzaffarabad division, so whatever result comes from these 24 seats, combined with the earlier results, will naturally influence the third phase of the election.

And it's even possible that there may be no need to hold the third phase of elections at all, because if you took nine seats after the first phase, and then win 12 or 13 seats out of the 24 in the second phase, you attain a simple majority, meaning... there are 45 directly elected seats, so if you win 23 of them, you get a simple majority. Why would you hold an election in the third phase then?

For a two-thirds majority? Who knows, another political party might support you for a two-thirds majority. We have seen in this very house that a chief minister was elected with 48 votes at 2:00 AM, and Farooq Haider, in a side conversation... with a journalist, mentioned a specific person's name, saying, "This is their assembly; we voted at their behest." In truth, if I sit here and say that we need them, then... what is the need for political voices?

Why should all this take place at all? I mean, why stage this sham of a political process? If everything is to be run at the command of a single officer or bureaucrat, then why these massive expenses, why all these things... Sir, obviously this is a lengthy debate.

We also spoke with Chaudhry Muhammad Durrani about this, and he said that the fault lies with politicians anyway—why, when one party joins hands with them, the other party stays in opposition? Why don't they all come together? So obviously, that is a debate present in Kashmir as well as here. In conclusion, if you could explain the role of the People's Party...

Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Look at the People's Party's role: Bilawal spoke several times in recent days about a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. And in his video messages regarding the AJK election campaign, he raised that very slogan, which is "Right to ownership, right to rule." And when he talked about a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, in Pakistan, they are in the ruling coalition, and in AJK, the prime minister belongs to their own party.

Now it is unclear whom he is making this demand to. Yesterday, the AJK Assembly passed a resolution stating that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission demanded by Bilawal should be formed. But the Prime Minister can set up that commission via a notification— at least to the extent of AJK, the Prime Minister of AJK could do so— yet instead of setting it up, he is demanding that... this commission should be formed.

So a Truth and Reconciliation Commission could be the best solution to this entire dispute, revealing who is guilty, on whose orders the JEK was... placed under proscribed status, on whose orders... such a large number of people were placed on the Fourth Schedule, whose ID cards are blocked, whose bank accounts are frozen, whose mobile SIM cards are blocked—to clear all these things up...

I mean, there are already so many issues, and you are creating hatred in a new place; so what will be the outcome of this? That again... Sir, obviously, you and I aren't... old enough to have directly witnessed... events in Pakistan's history, but we remember that in Lahore... there was an operation against Minhaj-ul-Quran in which around 12 deaths were claimed. Since then, at least within our conscious lifetime, we have witnessed these things, and after that, obviously, that cycle has been continuing.

However, at various times, voices also emerge to counter it, stepping forward to challenge these actions. Granted, the situation in Kashmir right now is tense. In various parts of Pakistan, too, at different times and periods... the situation has remained tense. But then some solution eventually emerges; one solution you mentioned was... truth and reconciliation.

As for the rest, I believe the leadership of JEK must also be considering it. Because obviously, they wouldn't want that either... No, they welcomed it, but it actually has to be formed first. I mean, they wouldn't want any further bloodshed either, or for young people to die there.

So, let's hope for the best that... whoever the decision-makers are, they now make a decision that is... acceptable to everyone. Thank you so much, Danish. Thank you.