Elections in Kashmir-VIII: “There will be larger participation: Prof Riyaz Punjabi”
11 Aug, 2002 · 823
Suba Chandran interviews Prof Riyaz Punjabi on elections in J&K
How do you see foresee the forthcoming elections in Jammu and Kashmir?
Foresee in what sense?
Whether we are really in a position to conduct free and fair elections, given the fact that the electoral rolls have not been revised in the last twenty years; how free would the elections be from the threat of the militants; how much participation would there be from the public and from the political leadership; how much participation would there be from the Hurriyat after the assassination of Abdul Ghani Lone?
This (revising the electoral rolls) is an important moral, political and even a legal point. If you want to conduct free and fair polls, the objective is that you allow people and voters to express their opinion. But if this complaint – that the electoral rolls have not been revised and those who have become eligible voters, if they have not been included, I think in order to have a free, fair and a credible poll enabling people to participate in the democratic process, you have to address this issue earnestly. I think it would raise the issue of credibility of the Election Commission if the voters’ list is not revised. In fact, this task should have been undertaken a year ago. Thus, there is an urgent need of the revision of electoral rolls so that opportunities are provided to vast number of people to participate (in the elections).
Second point is that, after the electoral rolls have been revised and people are told that they can express their opinions freely and frankly in a democratic atmosphere, at least one complaint goes. On the ground there are clear signals that there will be attempts from pro-Pakistan militant groups to vitiate the atmosphere and I think that they have already started it. Abdul Ghani Lone’s killing was the first terrible message. Threats are being issued day in and day out, especially in the rural areas. They are threatening the political leaders and workers; panchayat officials are being targeted with clear messages that they should keep away from the elections and resign from their positions. An atmosphere of fear and coercion has been generated to prevent the people from participating in the elections.
At the same time, the mainstream parties – the National Conference, Congress, BJP and the PDP – are gearing to participate in the elections. I have a feeling that people are still under threat. It remains to be seen that inspite of the efforts of the mainstream parties, how much percentage of increase would there be in the elections.
The Hurriyat Conference has not taken a position on participating in the elections, although they are covertly saying that there is nothing wrong in participating in the elections. Similarly we now see articles written by Jamaat Islami ideologues appearing in the local media. The new thinking from the separatist camp is that they are asserting that elections per se would not resolve Kashmir problem, but if the fair elections result in improving the governance there is nothing wrong in it, because people have day-to-day problems such as employment, corruption, nepotism, security etc. This is a new internal shift. One has to see whether this shift sustains itself, enabling people to participate in elections and ultimately in the governance.
There seems to be confusion within the Hurriyat on responding to the elections, given the threat from the militants. If the top leadership in the Hurriyat is not participating, is there a possibility that it will allow its second rung leadership to participate?
There is no clear indication about that. And what is the second rung leadership? These are presumptions. What might happen is that they (the Hurriyat) might covertly extend their support to some independent candidates or some political formation. But I don’t think they will come directly and participate in the elections.
Given this factor, that the Hurriyat is not going to participate, how much participation would there be from the political parties and the public, especially in the Valley?
This is what I have been saying that we have to watch. But definitely, compared to the 1996 elections, there would be an increase in participation in the elections. How much increase –we have to wait and see.
What makes you feel that there would an increased participation in the elections? When compared to the 1996 elections, there was a decline in the 1998 Parliamentary elections. One of the main reasons for the decline, it is claimed, has been the poor governance of the National Conference. This aspect has not improved since the 1998 elections. So what makes you believe that there would be an increased participation in the forthcoming elections?
There is an increase in overall political activity. Moreover, people have realized that they need good governance. For that, if they sleep or let it go by, then, the present dispensation would continue. In 1996, there was not so much mobilization as it is now. Mobilization has certainly increased. In 1996, there was virtually a single party, particularly in Kashmir. But now there are other parties. And new political groups have come up. Even if they manage one seat or even if they don’t, they would certainly enhance the participation. There will definitely be a larger participation than it was earlier. Although these parties are localized, say in a district, there would be mobilization in that particular district and the other party or a group might have presence in another district. When you collect all these districts together, then you will see that there would be larger participation.
Coming to the National Conference – first, on the change of leadership. How effective would it be? Will Omar’s leadership turn the fortunes for the NC? There are many criticisms against him, that he is inexperienced, cannot speak the local language etc. Secondly, NC is the only party which has representation from all the three regions. And, its main agenda is autonomy. With the Union government turning down the autonomy resolution passed by the NC government, how will the NC perform in the forthcoming elections?
First, we have to admit that the National Conference revived the process of governance in Kashmir during very difficult times. Before that, it was chaos, confusion and there was no semblance of governance. The credit goes to the party that the writ of the state runs now. There is an administration, there is a policeman, there is a head-clerk, and there is a secretary. Howsoever weak, the state apparatus is alive and kicking. Earlier you had the Governor, his advisors, Army and the paramilitary on the one hand. On the other hand, you had the militants who had set up their own system, even a judicial system, which they called Sharia Courts. Now you have courts, police and administration.
But I think the expectation level from that National Conference was very high. On this issue, we have to admit that they have failed. Perhaps, the administrators did not perform. I don’t know. There are huge allegations of corruption, nepotism, favoritism etc. Having said that, the NC represents all the regions of the state. It is there for the last sixty or seventy years and they are lucky that they don’t have a formidable challenge. Nobody has the capacity to take on this party as a whole. You may try to take them on a piecemeal basis, say in one constituency or in one district. But the NC remains the single largest party in Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
As far as Omar Abdullah’s leadership is concerned, I think there are both positive and negative sides to it. Omar Abdullah is seen as a young man, who can enthuse the party and politics. He is also seen as a clean man and very forthright. These are his positive assets. But how much is this relevant in general polity? I have no idea. But definitely he can reform his party. He has to work hard and probably he has started learning the language also. But more than that, it is how he performs. How is he seen, that is more important. If he is seen as a clean honest and forthright man and not run of the mill politician, he can do better. But he will have to work hard for that. He has to communicate to the masses, meet them and interact with them.
On the issue of autonomy, it is linked to the final resolution of the problem in Kashmir. Autonomy is one of the ways, and I don’t see any other, towards resolving the conflict. Perhaps, the Central government feels that if at all we have to consider it, why should we not talk across the board and why talk about this to one party only. Definitely the Central government should initiate a dialogue with the government on autonomy. I think it was wrong on their part to have rejected the autonomy resolution. They should have at least started a national debate on what is the autonomy they are asking for. I feel that part of the disenchantment of the people with the Central government has been the rejection (of the autonomy resolution).
Let us discuss what the expectations of the National Conference are. How far do they want to go? Also, give indications to the separatists that these are the parameters that we would like to talk to you. If discussion is not held on this, it gives the impression that the Union government is not interested in anything.
Obviously, this should be the feeling inside the Valley: If the Union government is not going to even speak to my representatives on such a crucial issue, then why should I participate in the elections?
See, these are two different issues and let us not join them. Popular participation and the formation of government is one issue and autonomy is a different issue. Autonomy is the manifesto of the NC for a long time, particularly after the accord of Sheikh Abdullah and Mrs Gandhi. But to link autonomy with participation, I think, is not justified.
What would be advisable is that the Union government starts a discussion on autonomy and says these are the parameters and talk to everybody across the board. Simultaneously, it should also provide all facilities for free and fair polls. Convey the message that if you remain outside the pale of the elections then you are the losers.
Saying ‘we will give autonomy, you come and participate in the elections’ … it won’t work that way. We should not forget that there is another factor also – Pakistan, which repeatedly insists that it is a dispute between India and Pakistan.
The Union government should invite all the parties and we should have a debate at the national level. On occasions, this country has arisen as one. Kashmir should be seen as a national problem and not the headache of one party, especially when it has come on the radar of the international screen.
What are the possibilities of a Third Front in Jammu and Kashmir?
It is good to have a third front. If they have popular support, then let them prove it, even if the votes are less. Sometimes the elections work like this. For the first time Jammu Parliamentary seat went to NC, not because the people supported it, but the votes were divided between the BJP and the Congress. Same thing can happen if there are multiangular contests and the third front has a chance. Electoral arithmetic works like that.
The smaller groups or individuals can form the third front after they have won the elections or they may develop a pre-poll understanding and have a common program at this point of time and fight the elections together. It would be a healthy development.
The efforts to communally mobilize the society, following the RSS idea of trifurcation – how effective would it be? Will there be any negative implications on the forthcoming elections?
In the last Parliamentary elections, the Jammu Mukti Morcha, which spearheads the movement for a separate Jammu state, did not get more than a thousand votes. They lost their deposits. It didn’t cut much ice. But definitely this slogan is polarizing the people and this is very dangerous and is not good either for the state or the country as a whole.
A specific question on international observers. India’s Chief Election Commissioner has announced that anybody is welcome to observe the elections. Why not make the international observers formal? By doing so, the entire world will come to know that who is for elections and who is against. India will be able to prove who is against democracy in Jammu and Kashmir. Would not a formal international observation, then, be India’s interests?
I agree with this and support this. At one point of time, I was not in favour of this. Given the way the western powers are insisting on free and fair polls and even the separatists, I think, there is no harm in having international observers. In any case, foreign journalists go to Jammu and Kashmir. If it is formalized, it will enhance the credibility of the elections.
There is a criticism that during previous elections the security forces forced the population to vote. But the argument from the forces has been that they only asked them to vote. What should be the government’s strategy on this?
One should understand that Kashmir is a highly politicized society and in fact people wanted to participate in the elections. Most of the people wanted to vote and they wanted a pretext to do so, given the threat from the militants. If the security forces had asked them to vote for one party or the other, then the problem would be different. The security forces prodded the people to participate. In the forthcoming elections, we should give protection to those who desire to participate. If they need a pretext, then we should give that also.
What would be Pakistan’s strategy and how can India combat it?
Pakistan would want to see that the elections are boycotted. Even if they are conducted they would like the percentage to be lower. Our strategy should be to tell the international community that we have created an opportunity and we are ensuring that the polls are free and fair. This is where international observers would become useful. The diplomatic initiative should start right now against Pakistan. We should talk to Europe, US and even to OIC. We should tell them here is an opportunity, if not towards resolution of the problem, at least towards peace.