Growing Discontent in Pakistan-Administered Jammu and Kashmir: Questions Over Governance and Representation

In June this year, violent clashes erupted between police and local protestors in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir (PaJK), resulting in death and injuries to scores of people. The immediate trigger for the protests was the ban on the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), a grassroots civil society coalition, under the Anti-Terrorism Act. The JAAC had emerged in 2023 to protest soaring electricity bills, wheat prices, and governance issues. Islamabad’s approach to the festering grievances — while it did meet some demands, larger issues have been ignored — together with its use of force against protesters, has resulted in the periodic eruption of mass protests. Political analyst and author of “Across the LoC: Inside Pakistan-Administered Jammu and Kashmir” Luv Puri spoke to The Diplomat’s South Asia editor Sudha Ramachandran about what is driving this little-known but important and complex conflict on the Pakistani side of the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border between the two parts of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). Puri said, “The protest demands combine everyday governance concerns with deeper structural, political, and economic issues.” Unlike disquiet on the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir, which manifested in an armed insurgency against the Indian state, public anger in PaJK has been more muted. However, Islamabad cannot be complacent. As Puri noted, “while many participants state that their demands are not directed against Pakistan itself, they also express frustration over contradictions within Pakistan’s Kashmir policy and the handling of dissent.” What triggered the recent violence in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir (PaJK)? The recent unrest in PaJK – which has reportedly claimed at least 20 lives this year according to official figures, following at least 17 deaths during last year’s protests – appears less an isolated episode than the continuation of a deeper political and social process that has become increasingly visible over the past two years. Rather than a sudden eruption of discontent, the recurring protests point to accumulating grievances over governance, representation, and the relationship between the region and Pakistan’s federal establishment. Focusing only on immediate triggers risks overlooking deeper frustrations shaped by decades of political manipulation, constrained political expression and perceptions of political hypocrisy. The Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) was banned by the establishment, which also announced rewards for information leading to the arrest of its members. The locals cite the decision as an example of hypocrisy, noting that less than a year earlier, senior Pakistani ministers such as Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah had met with several of the group’s leaders to address their demands. What stands out is that the protest demands combine everyday governance concerns with deeper structural, political, and economic issues. They range from improving public services, including access to MRI facilities and healthcare, to institutional reforms such as abolishing the reserved refugee seats in the legislative assembly. Taken together, these demands suggest that public discontent extends beyond administrative shortcomings to the very framework through which PaJK is governed. The movement, therefore, is not merely about service delivery but also about questions of political representation, accountability, and the region’s constitutional relationship with Pakistan. Alongside this, a current of opinion supporting an independent Jammu and Kashmir has persisted within the region. Its supporters have long argued that they bore the brunt of state pressure. Notably, among figures associated with recent agitation, some identified by authorities belong to this ideological stream. While immediate grievances may trigger mobilization, they often reveal deeper, long-standing tensions. In PaJK, the current unrest must therefore be understood within a broader political history shaped by the unresolved legacies of Partition and growing discontent with the Pakistani state’s political and constitutional approach to the region. The recent developments also unfolded within a broader geopolitical context in which Pakistan’s international profile appeared to rise following its role in facilitating dialogue between the United States and Iran. Against this backdrop, the Pakistani establishment viewed the crisis as an unnecessary domestic irritant to be defused quickly and, unlike during a similar episode last year, adopted a more hardline posture. Media reports have drawn attention to governance issues. But there are strong political roots to the anger and unrest. Could you throw light on this? What is the political arrangement in PaJK? There is little doubt that political factors underpin much of the anger and periodic unrest witnessed in PaJK. The region’s institutions evolved not in isolation but within the broader framework of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy and its wider political culture. At a broader level, political leadership in PaJK has often shifted alongside changes in Islamabad. Given the region’s institutional structure and financial dependence, Pakistan retains significant political and fiscal leverage, reinforcing perceptions that political outcomes are externally influenced rather than locally driven. The Islamabad-based Kashmir Council, chaired by Pakistan’s prime minister, was widely regarded as more influential than the PaJK Legislative Assembly for much of the region’s history. Although the 13th Amendment to the Interim PaJK Constitution in 2018 transferred many of the Council’s powers to the PaJK government, critics contend that Pakistan’s federal establishment continues to exercise significant influence through other constitutional and administrative mechanisms. Geography and economics also mattered. A mountainous region with limited economic diversification, combined with the centrality of Kashmir in Pakistan’s national imagination, left limited space for politics focused primarily on local governance and socio-economic issues. Even so, local leadership has generally remained aware of political red lines. Demands have largely been framed around governance, more fiscal outlays from Islamabad, and budgetary allocations commensurate with population rather than complete rupture. Why is the question of refugee seats so contentious? First, it is important to explain what these 12 seats represent. The 12 reserved seats, commonly referred to as the “refugee seats,” in the PaJK Legislative Assembly are designated for individuals and families who migrated to Pakistan in 1947 from areas that today fall on the Indian side of J&K. Their origins l