Firdous Syed: How does India want to be seen by Kashmir?

The situation in Kashmir after a spate of human rights violations — particularly the Sopore custodial killing — is yet to pacify. There are reports of another fake encounter in Poonch, Jammu. Two men have been arrested and ‘independent inquires have been ordered by the police and the army into the incident.’

Nothing will change. Despite the prime minister promising ‘zero tolerance’ and the chief minister ordering inquires, human rights violations, disgustingly, will continue to be heaped on the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

It’s a pressure cooker-like situation. Forget the separatists, who due to their ideological differences with the state invite the wrath of the system, even peace loving saner elements are bound to lose their mental equilibrium in such stifling situations.

In any other place, a human rights violation may be cause for embarrassment for the rulers. Even hardboiled politicians like to cover-up their lapses, and show some inclination towards rectifying mistakes. Not in Kashmir. Suppression of human rights is a way to control the population in Kashmir. If suppression is not part of state policy, why do grave human right violations occur with impunity?

No doubt, the security forces are forced to deal with a very difficult situation; while fighting with Pakistan-sponsored militancy, at times human rights violations may take place.

To rectify the weaknesses, the system should have inbuilt mechanisms to undo the wrongs committed and also punish the culprits appropriately. Regrettably as a matter of routine, every human rights violation goes unchecked here. In some high-profile cases few individual have been booked.

Yet dilly-dallying tactics are adopted and every effort is made to protect culprits and defeat the very purpose of the prosecution. The acts of omissions in the line of duty may have some faulty logic for a cover-up, but legally — and morally — there is none.

Even the perpetrators of glaring human rights violations — criminals in the garb of uniform carried out the murder of innocent civilians purely for personal reasons —have gone scot-free. In many cases, even the CBI has found cases fit for prosecution.

Taking refuge behind the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, permission has been denied for the prosecution of these rogue elements. Why are people in Kashmir blamed if they think that grave human rights violations are leniently dealt with in order to curb militancy? In the absence of any will to punish the perpetrators people of valley have every right to suspect the policy of the state.

In order to spite the face the system is busy cutting its own nose. To curb militancy, indiscriminate powers with little accountability have been bestowed on security forces.

Defeating militancy is the primary objective; wining hearts and minds is of little concern. While the menace of militancy might have been defeated, widespread human rights violations have deepened the prevailing alienation. The human rights violations are not the only issue; the present choked conditions have denied people all avenues for peaceful protest.

A vast and diverse country like India is a land of enormous contradictions; democracy here acts as a safety value. Multiple religious traditions thrives side-by-side with innumerable social divides and subdivides. Varied options of freedom of expression available to the common citizen and help release many of the social and economic tensions. India’s rich democratic credentials have largely helped to bind the country into one federal unit.

However, Jammu and Kashmir is a different ballgame. Here policymakers — particularly the ever-suspecting bureaucrats — have shown little faith in the democratic values.

Democracy is of little value or of no use. The so-called narrow national security concerns far outweigh the paramount importance of true freedom of expression.

The rulers gleefully recognise people’s participation in mundane electoral processes as a triumph of democracy. In return the hapless people are denied the freedom of expression and right to dissent. There is no denying the fact that the people of Kashmir have different aspirations. Denying them their democratic rights is no answer.

Suppressing the people will never subdue the different aspirations, whereas allowing them to express themselves will only restore their faith in democracy. For an ordinary Kashmiri how is India to be defined? As a benevolent democracy or a deep security state? The rulers will have to make a hard choice.