GILGIT BALTISTAN- A PERSPECTIVE
Weekly Bang-e-sahar Saturday May 24 30,2008

Geneva: Gilgit-Baltistan is a part of Jammu and Kashmir. The area is of strategic importance as it has borders with Afghanistan and China. Since partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947, and the coming into being of Pakistan, democratic and political freedom and human rights situation in Gilgit-Baltistan has been very bad and the population has been suffering. This was stated by Universal Periodic Review submitted to Belgian Association for Solidarity with Jammu and Kashmir at the second session of a conference in Brussels recently. It said rights organizations in Pakistan itself have been raising voices against the inhuman treatment meted out to the people of this region by the Pakistan administration. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan calls the situation as volatile and is of the opinion that the federal government is directly responsible for this sorry state of affairs. Pakistani policymakers have kept the constitutional status of the area in a limbo, making the region an extraordinary example of political and judicial ambivalence. The unrest in Gilgit-Baltistan has been there for decades, leading to movements for self-governance and independence from the federal rule of Pakistan. In 2007, clashes claimed about 200 lives. The region lacks fundamental rights infrastructure. According to the well-known American human rights organization Freedom House, this region has been categorized ‘Not Free’. It does not have a democratically elected assembly, a constitution or an independent judiciary. It is ruled directly by the federal government in Islamabad through the Ministry for Kashmir and Northern Areas Affairs. There is no appeal against the judgments of the Judicial Commissioner. Pakistan’s Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the area. The government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is also under Pakistani administration and being a part of Jammu and Kashmir too doesn’t have any jurisdiction over Gilgit-Baltistan. Access to justice to all is a fundamental right, and that right cannot be exercised in the absence of an independent judiciary. Without formation of a High Court and a bench of the Supreme Court in the region, access to justice will remain an elusive dream. Pakistan never claimed Gilgit-Baltistan as belonging to its territory. The constitution of Pakistan and its map don’t show it as belonging to Pakistan. On the other hand, it does not show it as a part of Jammu and Kashmir either. At the same time Pakistan is not prepared to give it an independent status or to enable its people to adopt a modern transparent democratic system. They are closely watched by different ’security agencies’ operating in Gilgit-Baltistan There is no representation of the people in the National Assembly. The locals need an exit permit for moving out of the area. Economically, the region is the most backward area. It doesn’t have basic infrastructure like roads, power supply, sanitation and health care. It has no university, no professional college, postgraduate facilities. No radio, no television station. There is just one weekly newspaper. Open discrimination in the matter of wages between the natives and those coming from outside is a blatant violation of human rights. The locals are paid 25% to 35% less than those coming from outside. The region is a Shia dominated area. Pakistan has always treated them as suspects. Demographic shifts are being engineered with an aggressive policy of resettlement by encouraging influx of Punjabis, Pathans and other people from the rest of Pakistan. Large tracts of land are being allotted to outsiders, who are liberally provided residency permits.

Baroness Emma Nicholson of Winterbourne, Member of the European Parliament and Vice Chairperson of the European Union Committee on Foreign Affairs, writes in her report (adopted by the European Parliament during the plenary session of 24 May 2007): Pakistan still lacks full implementation of democracy in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and has yet to take steps towards democracy in Gilgit-Baltistan; Is concerned that the Gilgit-Baltistan region enjoys no form of democratic representation whatsoever; The people of Gilgit-Baltistann are under direct rule of the military and enjoy no democracy; Calls on Pakistan to hold elections for the first time in Gilgit-Baltistan; Deplores documented Human Rights violations by Pakistan including in Gilgit-Baltistan, where allegedly violent riots took place in 2004, and the all too frequent incidents of terror and violence perpetrated by armed militant groups; urges Pakistan to revisit its concepts of the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of religious practice in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan; Calls on the government of Pakistan to specifically address the issue of child rights and protection in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan and to target child trafficking more effectively; Draws particular attention to the democratic deficit in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, where, regrettably, Pakistan has consistently failed to fulfill its obligations to introduce meaningful and representative democratic structures. Bad as the situation is in Azaad Jammu and Kashmir, it is infinitely worse in Gilgit-Baltistan, the northernmost area of Pakistan-Administered Kashmir, which enjoys no status or even the semblance of democratic representation; Gilgit-Baltistan (referred to as the Northern Areas by Pakistan) is administered by Pakistan. As Pakistan maintains that the whole of Jammu and Kashmir is disputed territory, it has not formally incorporated the Northern Areas. As such, it is neither a province of Pakistan nor a part of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The Northern Areas Council, set up some time ago, with the boast that it is functioning like a ‘Provincial Assembly’, screens, in reality, a total absence of constitutional identity or civil rights; The people of Gilgit-Baltistan are kept in poverty, illiteracy and backwardness. The deprivation and lack of even very basic needs provision can be easily seen. A few locals are able to secure government jobs but even then they are paid up to 35% less than non-native employees; there is no local broadcast media; The 2005 earthquake, disastrous in itself, exacerbated all the above. It would be wholly irresponsible not to draw attention to this situation or to highlight these continuing injustices, and the report therefore underlines forcefully the need for Pakistan to revisit its concept of democratic accountability and to address the needs provision issue in the areas under its (de facto) control.

JIHADI FUNDAMENTALISM AND ITS IMPACT ON HUMAN RIGHTS:

Since military dictatorship was imposed in 1999, it became clear that jihadi infrastructure was not dismantled nor were moderate political parties allowed to push back against fundamentalists in the political arena. While claiming to fight extremism, the military was using its forces in Balochistan denying the anti-Taliban, secular Baloch parties their constitutional rights. Secular parties have been excluded from the tribal areas which have been increasingly overrun by jihadis resulting in a complete mismanagement in Balochistan and North-West Frontier Province. Ironically the policy has been to clamp down on the press and the judiciary to curb terrorism but in fact those who have been arrested are progressive, secular minded people while the terrorists are offered negotiations and ceasefires. As the military was filling the jails with lawyers and journalists, they were releasing militants, some of whom had been convicted of terrorism, in yet another deal with violent extremists. Pakistan also refused to close Taliban camps and jihadi madrasas or end extremist recruitment and fundraising. Pakistan has become a safe haven for terrorists. It has everything terrorists could ask for: political instability, a trusted network of radial Islamists, an abundance of angry anti-Western recruits, secluded training areas and security services that don’t always do what they are supposed to do. Terrorists and armed militants have turned much of the country, including some cities, into a base that gives them more room to maneuver, both internally and beyond. They come and go as they please inside Pakistan. They attend services at local mosques, where after prayers they speak to the congregation, soliciting donations to support the war against the West. Their sick and injured are taken care of in private hospitals. Guns and supplies are readily available.
CONCLUSIONS: Asma Jahangir, special UN rapporteur on Human Rights, appeals to the friends of Pakistan to urge the US administration to stop all support of the dictator, as his lust for power is bringing the country close to a worse form of civil strife. She believes that Musharraf has to be taken out of the equation and a government of national reconciliation to be put in place. It must be backed by the military. Short of this there are no realistic solutions. Military training, cooperation and aid should be reviewed. At the same time aid for education, poverty reduction, healthcare and relief work should be expanded, channeling money through secular non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Successive Pakistani governments, which call for ‘basic human rights’ in the Indian Jammu and Kashmir state, ignore these very rights in the case of the Northern Areas and Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Militants, fundamentalists and even the government of Pakistan have argued that in the Kashmir case, the special concept of jihad or holy war applies, which supersedes all international humanitarian laws but in a world of myriad religions and ways of life, no one religious interpretation can substitute for internationally accepted standards and law.
Democracy is not only more acceptable than military rule, but would reduce the influence of fundamentalist Islamists significantly. Speak out unequivocally for democracy in Pakistan, rejecting the idea that martial law is needed for stability, and demand a return to constitutional order. What are needed are political solutions to conflicts and improved long-term security. None of this will be easy to implement but it offers more hope than more of the same. Pakistan needs change: it can only begin when military dictatorship goes and democracy returns.

Gilgit-Baltistan amalgamation: India must react

By Alok Bansal

With the signing of the Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order 2009 by President Asif Ali Zardari Sep 7, the Pakistan government has taken the first step towards amalgamating this strategically significant part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan. The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) government has patted itself on the back for undertaking far-reaching administrative, political, financial and judicial reforms in this region.

The order ostensibly offers autonomy to this region which till date had neither any status under the Pakistani constitution nor any modicum of self-governance. The region has since 1947 been governed by bureaucrats from Pakistan as a colony, without any avenue whatsoever of any judicial review. The order, signed by the president and aimed at giving more internal and political autonomy to the region, was unanimously approved by the Pakistan government Aug 29.

The order renames the region as Gilgit-Baltistan — it was hitherto called ‘Northern Areas’ — fulfilling a longstanding demand of the residents. It also gives the region a local administration headed by a ‘Chief Minister’, a post that did not exist. The chief minister will be elected by the Gilgit-Baltistan legislative assembly and will head a council of ministers, comprising six ministers and two advisers. The legislative assembly will consist of 24 directly elected members as well as six women and three technocrats who will be elected by the members.

The order proposes some financial autonomy for the region. A consolidated fund has accordingly been created. The budget for the region will be presented and approved by the assembly. It also incorporates a judicial set-up with the establishment of an appellate court, comprising a chief justice and two other judges; there is a provision in the order to eventually increase the strength of the court to five. The order has provision for a separate public service commission, a chief election commissioner and an auditor general for the region.

However, the devil lies in the detail. Neither the chief minister nor the legislative assembly will have any worthwhile powers. The real powers will be with the governor of Gilgit-Baltistan who will be appointed by the president of Pakistan on the advice of the prime minister. Unlike the provinces of Pakistan, he will be an outsider. As of now, Minister of Kashmir and Northern Areas Qamar Zaman Kaira has been appointed governor till a new person is appointed.

Although a legislative assembly will be elected, the real powers will be with the council, whose chairman will be the prime minister of Pakistan and most of whose members will be appointees of the Pakistani government. Although the number of subjects on which the assembly can make law has been increased from 49 to 61, the council retains the exclusive power to legislate on 55 issues which are of much greater significance.

Certain issues like defence, foreign affairs and security are beyond the purview of both the assembly and the council. The chief justice of the appellate court will be appointed by the chairman of the council on the advice of the governor; other judges will also be appointed by the chairman on the advice of the governor after seeking views of the chief justice. The order says that the budget will be presented to the assembly and passed by it. However, what is significant is that it will be prepared by bureaucrats.

Similarly all members of the public service commission, the auditor general or the election commissioner will be either the direct or indirect appointees of the Pakistan government. Similarly all the key functionaries of the administration like the chief secretary, the finance secretary and the inspector general of police will be Pakistani bureaucrats deputed from outside. It is significant that the region has no representation in either the Pakistani parliament or the council of ministers, which will have the final say in the future set-up of the region.

It is thus quite clear that all the real executive, legislative and judicial powers will vest with outsiders or their appointees, whereas the Assembly or the Council of minister will in reality be toothless tigers.

The fact that the terminologies like the governor and the chief minister have been used, rather than the ‘President’ and ‘Prime Minister’, which are used for the heads of so-called ‘Azad Kashmir’, indicates a more sinister design to the whole exercise.

These cosmetic changes are intended to give an impression of autonomy, whereas the real attempt is to separate this strategic region, which has been an inalienable part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir since 1866, from the other part of Pakistani Kashmir to eventually gobble it. Right from 1947, Pakistan has systematically worked towards this end.

Immediately after occupation, it separated the State of Chitral, a vassal of the Maharaja of Kashmir, from the region and incorporated it in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP). In 1975, it abrogated the State Subject Rule, which had been set up to prevent outsiders from acquiring land or settling down in the region. After the abrogation, there has been a constant influx of Sunni Pakhtoons in this predominantly Shia region and the demographic profile has changed significantly.

The local leaders from the region as well as from other parts of Pakistan-administered Kashmir have severely denounced the order. According to Abdul Hamid Khan, chairman of the Balwaristan National Front, the order will further consolidate Pakistan’s hold on the region. According to Manzoor Hussain Parwana, the chairman of the Gilgit-Baltistan United Movement, it is a ploy to perpetuate Pakistan’s rule in the region. The Karakoram National Movement and the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) have also criticised the move.

In the past Indian response to the developments in the region has been quite muted. It is time India took up strongly the grievances of the inhabitants of this region, who are legally Indian citizens.

(10.09.09-The author, an editor of the book “Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: The Untold Story” is a senior researcher at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA).

Gilgit-Baltistan autonomy
By M. Ismail Khan
Wednesday, 09 Sep, 2009

The ‘autonomy package’ introduced by the government for the people of Gilgit-Baltistan is a mix of good and bad news. The good news is that the area will now have an autonomous status with a chief minister and a governor. The bad news is that it has been given only a province-like status and has no institutional link with the four provinces or the Pakistani constitution.

It is not yet clear how the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self-Governance Order 2009 signed by the president will affect the area’s denizens and other stakeholders. What is obvious, though, is that this is an entirely new experiment in statecraft where a democratically elected government has created a province-like entity through an order.

Prime Minister Gilani’s statement that Gilgit-Baltistan cannot be given constitutional status and representation in parliament because of Pakistan’s commitment to a UN resolution is a lame excuse as there is nothing in it that forbids Pakistan from providing legitimate constitutional rights to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. After all, Azad Jammu & Kashmir operate under an interim constitution enacted by the AJK Legislative Assembly in 1974.

Only recently President Zardari signed a memorandum of understanding with China for a 7000-MW power project in Gilgit-Baltistan. Then there’s the border agreement between Pakistan and China which is also provisional and subject to revision upon resolution of the Kashmir dispute. If the Pakistani government can enter into an agreement concerning Gilgit-Baltistan territories with a third party, there is hardly any justification for not entering into a constitutional accord, even if a provisional one, with the region’s people.

There are two clear strands of thoughts regarding a possible way forward. The pro-Pakistan majority supports the area’s inclusion in the federation of Pakistan as a province by adding Gilgit-Baltistan in Article 1 of the 1973 constitution as a territory of Pakistan — it could be subject to revision upon a final resolution of the Kashmir dispute. Others inspired by Kashmiri nationalist leaders call for an independent united states or confederation of Kashmir. Kashmiri leader Yasin Malik is talking about this and prefers that the status of Gilgit-Baltistan remain in limbo, followed by the option that the local assembly draft an interim constitution to enable the region to have a legitimate and comprehensive judicial, executive and legislative structure.

Prime Minister Gilani failed to admit that there has been tremendous pressure from Kashmiri nationalist leaders whenever the government has taken a policy decision on Gilgit-Baltistan. It is correct that the predicament goes back to the Kashmir dispute. The demand for a plebiscite on Kashmir may appear erroneous but it would be doubly wrong to make the innocent population of Gilgit-Baltistan (whose future was tied to the plebiscite) pay for someone else’s blunder.

The people insist that their area, as large as the NWFP, is not a territory awarded to Pakistan by the Radcliffe Boundary Commission. According to them, neither were they freed from foreign tribes as in AJK’s case. Gilgit-Baltistan, they argue, was liberated as a result of a spontaneous local revolt. Denizens opted to become a part of Pakistan and hence they believe that by getting rid of Dogra occupation, which predates the Amritsar treaty through which the regime acquired Kashmir from the British, they severed whatever symbolic relationship existed between Gilgit-Baltistan and the former princely state of Jammu & Kashmir.

On the other hand, the Kashmiri leadership has had difficulty in understanding Pakistan’s dilemma as, over the years, Gilgit-Baltistan’s geo-strategic importance has risen to a level where the area cannot be ‘donated’.

There was no Karakoram Highway in 1947 and the water and power crises in Pakistan have never been so acute as now. Policy circles realise that in a region beset with conflict and intense competition, Gilgit-Baltistan is crucial as a trade, water and oil corridor for South, West and Central Asia. With the Kalabagh dam off the table for the moment and climate change looming large, upstream water projects have become crucial for the survival and development of the country.

Containing some of the world’s largest freshwater resources on which the irrigated agriculture of Punjab and Sindh depends, the estimated hydroelectric potential of the eight rivers and countless streams in Gilgit-Baltistan goes beyond Pakistan’s current needs.

Ongoing mega projects like the Bhasha-Diamir dam further necessitates that Gilgit-Baltistan be brought into the mainstream and that its people be given a voice in national decision-making so that the region’s public representatives can also take part in inter-provincial deliberations to safeguard socio-economic interests.

Renaming the Northern Areas as Gilgit-Baltistan is perhaps the most significant part of the deal as far as the locals are concerned as this change in nomenclature will help people regain their lost identity and go a long way in resurrecting the tourism industry in an area otherwise devastated by the Taliban.

Moreover, the creation of the offices of an auditor-general, public service commission and chief election commissioner are positive steps that should have been taken years ago. But the increase in the list of subjects for the Gilgit-Baltistan assembly to legislate would mean little if the powers of the governor to discard edicts are not curtailed. Similarly, while the provision allowing the local assembly to debate the budget is a positive move what is also needed is to build the administration’s revenue-generation and financial-management capacity.

True, province-like status given to the region may have saved it from a situation similar to the one in restive Balochistan. However, if the reforms prove only cosmetic, the reaction of the people there could turn violent. If this happens, it would not only hurt the patriotic sentiments of nearly two million locals but also harm the country’s interest in a strategic and resource-rich region currently surrounded by the Indian military, the Chinese army, Nato forces and the Taliban.

Pakistan's Ordinance Giving Internal Political Autonomy To Northern Jammu, Kashmir Means Little

Madhavi Bhasin
September 9, 2009

The Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self-Governance Ordinance 2009 was approved by Pakistan's Federal Cabinet last week. The Ordinance is directed towards granting internal political autonomy to the Northern Areas of Jammu and Kashmir. The Ordinance, however, falls short of local demands and is only a change in nomenclature rather than genuine political reforms.

The 1949 ceasefire line resulted in the division of J&K with Pakistan gaining control over some portion of the disputed territory. Pakistan administered region of J&K was subsequently divided in 1970 into two administrative zones: Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Federally Administered Northern Regions. AJK is constitutionally not a part of Pakistan and is governed by an elected President, Prime Minister and Legislature. Northern Areas are under the direct control of Islamabad and is ruled through a Northern Area Council headed by Pakistan's Minister for Kashmir Affairs.

The Empowerment Ordinance 2009, introduced as a replacement of the Northern Areas' Legal Framework Order 1994, completely overlooks the basic demands of the local population. The Northern Areas have been struggling to free itself from the control of the Pakistani Government for several decades. After years of judicial and legal ambivalence, the Government of Pakistan seeks to extend and reinforce its control over the Northern Areas through the alleged "reform package". The treatment meted out to the people of the Northern Areas for decades have made them skeptical of federal control.

The constitution of Pakistan and its map don't show the Northern Areas as belonging to Pakistan. At the same time Pakistan is not prepared to give the region an independent status or to enable its people to adopt a modern, transparent democratic system. Northern Areas thus have no politico-constitutional status. K2, the only weekly published in the Northern Areas, carries a message on its mast-head which succinctly summarizes the emotional state of the people in the Northern Areas; it reads 'Sarzamin -Be - Ain Ki Awaz' meaning "the voice of the constitution-less."

The people of Northern Areas do not have any justifiable fundamental rights since they are technically not citizens of Pakistan. The Frontier Crime Regulations is in force in the region under which every resident of the region has to report regularly to local intelligence personnel. The locals need an exit permit for moving out of the area.

Until 1994 the region had no elected assembly or even municipal bodies. In October 1994 first elections to the Northern Areas Executive Council were held and the Council continues to remain an advisory. In 1999 the Pakistan's Supreme Court in a landmark ruling directedthe Pakistani government to extend basic rights to the people of Northern Areas within six months and treat them as Pakistani citizens. The judgment has not been implemented and in the 2001 elections across the country, the residents of Northern Areas were not granted voting rights. Thus the people of the Northern Areas do not have any representation in the Pakistan National Assembly.

Balawaristan National Front, under the Chairmanship of Abdul Hamid Khan has been protesting against the illegal Pakistani occupation of the Northern region while the Yasin Malik faction of the JKLF demands that the Northern areas, along with rest of J&K, be given the right of self-determination. According to Amir Humza, a leader from Gilgit, "It is a fact that people of this region (Northern Areas) are facing more human rights violations and whenever the official media talks of repression in Indian Kashmir, people with strong hearts laugh at this hypocritical attitude and people with weak hearts cry."

The local population was not consulted at any stage of drafting the Empowerment Ordinance. A committee under the Chairmanship of the Minister of Kashmir and Northern Areas has prepared the "reform" package. Post of the Minister for Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas (KANA) will continue to co-exist with newly created position of the Governor. Thus the executive authority of the newly christened Gilgit-Baltistan region will continue to rest with federal agents. No concrete commitment has been made with regard to the timing of the elections to actualize a large part of the reform package. The move could also impact Pakistan's stand on the wider Jammu and Kashmir dispute with India. Pakistan has always emphasized on resolving the J&K dispute by ascertaining the wishes of the people of J&K, making the unilateral transformation with regard to the politico-legal status of the Northern Areas a diplomatic gaffe.

Amanullah Khan, leader of the pro-independence Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, rejected the package, saying it appeared to be aimed at merging the disputed areas into Pakistan. According to Jammu and Kashmir National Awami Party (JKNAP) president Liaqat Hayyat, the Empowerment Ordinance is "nothing but a little joke to the people of this region and the state of Jammu (and) Kashmir."

Pakistan's move is doubly problematic: apart from under-addressing the anxiety of the people of the Northern Areas, the Empowerment Ordinance has further complicated the politico-legal dimensions of the J&K dispute. Complete silence on the part of the international community and India on the issue gives the impression that the LOC has been accepted as fait accompli and Pakistan sovereign right over Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas is implicitly accepted.