Elections in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) are around the corner, and political tensions between PoJK and Pakistan are taking new turns with each passing day. At the forefront of this political conundrum is the Jammu and Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC), an amalgam of various local groups and civil society bodies. For months, the JKJAAC has been leading demonstrations against Islamabad over rising inflation, the energy crisis, unemployment, and the demand for political and electoral reforms. The committee has submitted a 38-point charter of demands to the Pakistani government, calling for sweeping structural reforms, economic relief measures, and changes to the existing political and electoral framework. Although reports suggest that consensus has been reached on 21 of the 38 points, most of which relate to public welfare issues, the remaining 17 key demands, primarily focused on political and governance reforms, continue to remain far from consensus. These unresolved issues have emerged as the principal stumbling block in negotiations between the two sides, raising eyebrows about political stability in the region ahead of elections.

These unresolved demands include the revocation of 12 reserved seats for refugees, the abolition of mandatory oath of allegiance to the region's integrity, devolution and governance reforms.
Out of 53 seats in PoJK, 12 are reserved for those who migrated from Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan and are now residing across Pakistan, far removed from PoJK's on-ground realities. Locals allege that these 12 seats contribute to unfair representation in the occupied region due to their extraterritorial nature. They also claim that these seats serve as a channel for Islamabad to influence electoral outcomes in PoJK, enabling Pakistan to control the political balance in the region. According to locals, these seats largely favour Pakistan, allowing Islamabad to maintain a pro-Pakistan government in PoJK that echoes its voice, leaving no scope for criticism or opposition. Critics argue that these seats create the optics of the so-called Kashmir issue in the international arena and among Pakistan's own citizens, helping Pakistan gain political leverage within the country. They also contend that these seats allow Islamabad to maintain control over the affairs of PoJK.
The second underlying issue is the mandatory oath. Elected members are required to take an oath affirming their support and loyalty to the occupied region's accession to Pakistan and to the idea of Pakistan. If the oath is refused, members are denied entry into politics and may even face punishment covertly. Critics argue that this requirement restricts political pluralism and prevents individuals with differing political views from participating in the democratic process. They contend that it insulates Pakistan from political opposition and criticism, ensuring a legislative council that largely aligns with Islamabad's positions and policies.
The other major issue is the devolution of power. It calls for the transfer of authority, financial and administrative powers, and funds directly to local governments and municipal representatives. Supporters argue that greater decentralisation would enable local institutions to address regional needs more effectively and reduce dependence on Islamabad for governance and decision-making.
While several other issues have reportedly been resolved, these three demands remain the core concerns of locals and the JKJAAC. So far, three rounds of talks have been held, with the latest being a 10-hour marathon meeting involving JKJAAC, PoJK government, and Pakistan's high-powered federal committee. Despite lengthy negotiations, the parties have yet to reach an agreement on these issues, resulting in repeated deadlocks.
While the JKJAAC continues to insist on the revocation of the 12 reserved seats, the abolition of the mandatory oath, and the devolution of power, Pakistan appears determined to keep these provisions intact, as they provide Islamabad significant leverage over PoJK's political and administrative affairs. Although Pakistani officials have described the talks as constructive, the PoJK body remains dissatisfied and has maintained the 9th June call major strike to press for the same demands. Critics argue that Pakistan's unwillingness to compromise on these three issues strengthens the perception that these policies are designed to maintain control over PoJK’s politics, and governance structures. According to them, Islamabad's apparent reluctance to address these demands has been the primary reason for the failure to reach a final agreement. The decision to continue with the June 9 strike further reflects the breakdown of negotiations and growing frustration over what many perceive as Pakistan's unwillingness to meaningfully address these longstanding concerns.
For the outside world, PoJK may appear "Azad" or free, but the policies and laws imposed by Pakistan on the region suggest otherwise. Critics argue that Islamabad exercises such extensive control over the region that, even after more than seven decades, no major regional political party has emerged that can independently and effectively advocate for the interests of PoJK. Although the next round of talks is scheduled for next week, many observers remain sceptical about the prospects of a breakthrough. They argue that Pakistan's unwillingness to compromise on policies such as the reserved seats, the mandatory oath, and the concentration of powers has been the main obstacle to an agreement, as these mechanisms are widely seen as instruments through which Islamabad maintains control over PoJK.

Email:-----------------------------------alizaroon112@gmail.com