#dnaEdit: ‘Illegal’ detention

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed has always pursued a political line which is intended to embrace the disaffected elements in the Kashmir Valley, some of whom can be described as separatists and hardliners. The release of Masrat Alam Bhat, who had been in prison under the state’s Public Safety Act (PSA), by the PDP-BJP government, has evoked a near-hysterical response from the BJP, the RSS, the Congress and all other political parties. It was clear that this was a Pavlovian political response from all parties concerned. Given its stated hardline position on Kashmir’s separatist politics, the BJP had to express its displeasure with the new government’s decision on Masrat. The Congress and other opposition parties had to protest harder and louder to nail the PDP and the BJP. The incident, coming early in the days of the fledgling state government, manifests the contrary pulls and tensions integral to this alliance.

Predictably, the BJP and the NDA government told Parliament on Monday that they were not in the know of the state government’s decision. But the questions thrown up by the latest row go beyond the PDP-BJP spat. One of the central issues is the legitimacy that has been accorded to the PSA. Consider, for instance, that Bhat, notwithstanding the bar by the J&K high court on detention under the PSA beyond two years, has spent four years in jail.

Highly misused by the authorities, the PSA has been described by the Amnesty International as a “lawless law” whose rampant and unaccountable use has whittled down the investigation and prosecution abilities of J&K police. Taking refuge in PSA, the police in the state are dodging basic police work like gathering  evidence or contesting the case in judiciary.

Statistics available with J&K police suggest that the rate of conviction for unlawful weapons — one of the most common charges brought against alleged supporters or militant groups — is 0.5 per 100 cases: over 130 times lower than the national average in India. Similarly, the conviction rate for attempt to murder in J&K is eight times lower than the national average, seven times lower for rioting and five times lower for arson. In contrast, the number of persons in detention under the PSA is 14 times higher than the national average.

Yet, politicians in Parliament skirted these issues and resorted to political brinkmanship.

The seasoned politician that he is, Sayeed was aware of the implications that his controversial decision may trigger, particularly in the camp of his new alliance partner.

The BJP, for its part, may protest a little too loudly of engaging with the disaffected elements, but its leaders are aware that an alliance with the politically antithetical PDP is bound to bring with it the baggage of uneasy decisions. These are early days in the life of the PDP-BJP government. But the signs of conflict have already manifest themselves. What, however, needs to be addressed are the larger causes of disquiet in the conflict-ridden Valley. And this is where the indiscriminate use of the PSA acquires relevance in the contemporary politics of the state.

One of the charges against Bhat is of murder. The question is why did the state government have to use PSA when there are clear provisions in the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code to deal with murder?

Why was the murder charge not pursued? Why didn’t the trial for murder happen? Let’s remember that one of the big contributing factors in alienating the people in the Valley is the rampant misuse of laws.