NEW DELHI: Seven years after the Union government revoked Article 370, bifurcated the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories and promised a new era of peace, development and integration, an influential independent rights forum has painted a grim picture of the region.
While acknowledging improvements in the security situation, the Forum for Human Rights in Jammu and Kashmir says the constitutional changes of August 5, 2019, have failed to restore democratic governance, institutional accountability and public confidence.
Instead, it argues, Jammu and Kashmir continues to experience political uncertainty, shrinking civil liberties and an expanding governance deficit.
Released on the eve of the seventh anniversary of the constitutional changes, the Forum's latest report, "Jammu and Kashmir: Seven Years Under Union Rule", examines developments between August 2025 and July 2026. Running over nearly sixty pages, the report assesses civilian security, political and economic rights, freedom of expression, women and children's rights, Ladakh, and, for the first time, developments in Pakistan-held territories of Jammu and Kashmir.
Unlike reports issued by advocacy groups alone, the Forum's findings draw particular attention because of the stature of those associated with it. The body is co-chaired by Gopal Pillai, former Union Home Secretary, and Radha Kumar, former member of the Government of India's Group of Interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir.
Its members include former Supreme Court judge Justice Ruma Pal; former Chief Justice of the Delhi and Madras High Courts Justice A.P. Shah; former Orissa High Court Chief Justice, Justice Bilal Nazki; former Jammu and Kashmir High Court judge Justice Hasnain Masoodi; former National Human Rights Commission Secretary-General Probir Sen; historian Ramachandra Guha; former NCPCR chairperson Shantha Sinha; retired senior military officers including Lt Gen H.S. Panag, Maj Gen Ashok Mehta and Air Vice Marshal Kapil Kak, along with lawyers, academics and human rights advocates.
According to the report, its conclusions are based on government records, court proceedings, media reports, NGO documentation, interviews and legal petitions, with information cross-verified before publication.
The report begins by acknowledging that violence linked to militancy has declined compared to previous years. However, it cautions that improved security should not be mistaken for political normalcy.
"The security situation appeared to have improved but is still volatile, as is the political situation," the executive summary states.
According to the Forum, one of the most striking developments during the past year has been the growing disconnect between elected representatives and the administrative structure established after 2019. Although Jammu and Kashmir now has an elected government headed by Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, the report argues that effective authority continues to remain concentrated in the office of the Lieutenant Governor.
"Governance remains stalemated between the concentration of powers in the hands of the Lieutenant-Governor, who is not accountable to the people, and the elected administration, which is accountable to the people but has little to no powers of governance," it observes.
The recent grant of emergency powers over telecommunications to the Lieutenant Governor, it says, has further widened this imbalance.
The report also notes that the National Conference government's continued demand for restoration of statehood reflects increasing public dissatisfaction with the existing administrative arrangement.
The Forum argues that the constitutional question left unresolved after the Supreme Court's December 2023 judgement remains central to Kashmir's political future.
Its principal recommendation is unequivocal.
"Restore full statehood, repeal the 2019 Reorganisation Act," the report says.
Calling the downgrading of Jammu and Kashmir unprecedented in independent India, the Forum writes that "it is seven years since statehood was seized from Jammu and Kashmir in August 2019, the first time in independent India that an existing state has been demoted to Union Territory status."
Contrary to Federal Structure
It argues that the move runs contrary to India's federal constitutional framework and recalls that while upholding the abrogation of Article 370, the Supreme Court did not finally rule on the constitutionality of converting a full-fledged state into Union Territories because the Union government had assured the Court that statehood would be restored.
The report also refers to observations made by the then Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud urging restoration of statehood at the earliest and notes Justice Sanjiv Khanna's separate opinion questioning the constitutional validity of the state's bifurcation into two Union Territories.
Rejecting suggestions that security concerns should delay the process, the Forum says restoration of democratic institutions has become more urgent rather than less.
"There is a danger that the Union administration will again argue that the time is not appropriate for restoration of Jammu and Kashmir's statehood," it says. "Not only is that argument not tenable, but it can also be argued that this is exactly the time to do so."
The report maintains that the people of Jammu and Kashmir demonstrated after the Pahalgam attack that there remains space for democratic peace-building and argues that restoring full statehood would strengthen rather than weaken that process.
The Forum's assessment suggests that while the security environment has improved in parts of Jammu and Kashmir, the human rights situation remains deeply troubling. It argues that the past year was marked by arbitrary detentions, restrictions on civil liberties, surveillance, profiling and continued use of stringent security laws, even as the Jammu and Kashmir High Court increasingly intervened to protect personal liberty.
One of the report's central themes is what it describes as a widening gap between executive action and judicial scrutiny.
It notes that during the past year, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court delivered a series of significant judgments quashing detention orders under the Public Safety Act (PSA) and granting bail in cases registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
According to the Forum, many of these judgments criticised the police for weak evidence, procedural lapses and mechanical application of preventive detention laws.
"The Court's exasperation with arbitrary charges has been evident and increasing over the past two years," the report says. "But we are constrained to note that its repeated strictures do not appear to have led to course correction by the Jammu and Kashmir police."
The report describes this growing judicial intervention as one of the few encouraging developments in an otherwise difficult human rights landscape.
Among the cases cited is that of Mehraj Malik, the Aam Aadmi Party MLA from Doda East, whose detention under the Public Safety Act was quashed by the High Court. Justice Rahul Bharti observed that ordinary criminal law was sufficient to deal with the allegations against him and warned against misuse of preventive detention "under the garb of maintenance of public order."
Similarly, the Court set aside the detention of several individuals after finding that detention orders had been issued without independent application of mind or on stale and inadequate material.
In one case, Justice Rahul Bharti remarked that preventive detention could not be based on "unfounded and mirage-like suspicion," particularly where the liberty of a young person was involved. In another, Justice Moksha Kazmi described the detention of a man who appeared to have been mistaken for someone else as "shameless."
Yet the Forum cautions that many of these judicial victories came only after the accused had spent years behind bars.
"Unfortunately, in most cases the judgments have come after the accused have been in detention for prolonged periods of time," it observes.
The report also documents what it calls continuing misuse of preventive laws in a variety of situations, ranging from alleged overground workers and social media activity to public protests and even demonstrations demanding justice.
It cites the detention of protesters in Sopore after demonstrations over the alleged sexual assault of a school student, continued PSA detentions in ordinary law-and-order cases, and the invocation of UAPA provisions against youths who protested after the assassination of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier this year. According to the report, around 50 young protesters were booked under anti-terror provisions after demonstrations across the Valley.
The Forum also raises concern over the closure of Jamia Siraj-ul-Uloom in Shopian after authorities declared the educational institution an "unlawful association" under the UAPA. The decision affected nearly 600 students, while the grounds for the action were not disclosed publicly, the report notes.
Treatment of Kashmiris Outside
Another issue receiving considerable attention is the treatment of Kashmiris outside the region following the November 2025 Red Fort bombing in Delhi.
The report says that "in a pattern which has grown familiar since 2019," Kashmiri Muslims once again became targets of suspicion and discrimination across the country.
Within hours of the attack, it says, social media was flooded with rumours and inflammatory messaging. Kashmiri students, traders and professionals reportedly faced housing discrimination, forced evictions, enhanced police verification, hostility from landlords and harassment at workplaces. Universities were asked to collect detailed information about Kashmiri students, while police in Gurugram directed landlords and housing societies to submit lists of tenants from Jammu and Kashmir.
The Forum is critical of the Union government's response.
It argues that unlike earlier instances when the Union Home Ministry issued advisories to protect Kashmiri students after major militant attacks, no comparable preventive measures were taken this time.
Instead, the report says, official actions in some places contributed to an atmosphere of suspicion.
Within Kashmir itself, the report links the Red Fort attack to an extensive security crackdown.
It records that approximately 500 people were questioned following the bombing, while more than 2,000 suspected overground workers were detained across the Valley after the killing of police constable Ashiq Hussain Qureshi in Anantnag during the Amarnath Yatra. According to the Forum, the sheer scale of the detentions suggests "indiscriminate action" by the police rather than targeted investigation.
The report further notes that security arrangements for this year's Amarnath Yatra reached unprecedented levels, including multi-layered deployment, no-fly zones, QR code-based identity cards for service providers and restrictions on civilian movement along the Jammu-Srinagar National Highway. While recognising the need to protect pilgrims, it says many residents viewed the extraordinary restrictions as another reminder of the continuing securitisation of everyday life.
The Forum also expresses concern over a government exercise to collect extensive personal information relating to mosques, madrassas, imams and members of mosque management committees. It says the information sought went far beyond routine administrative requirements, prompting the Muttahida Majlis-e-Ulema to describe the exercise as an infringement of privacy and religious freedom.
While security and constitutional questions dominate the debate over Jammu and Kashmir seven years after the August 5, 2019, changes, the Forum argues that equally serious challenges have emerged in the spheres of governance, economy and civil liberties.
According to the report, the political transition promised after the reorganisation of the former state has yet to deliver tangible improvements in the daily lives of ordinary people. Instead, it says, unemployment remains among the highest in the country, traditional sectors of the economy continue to struggle, and democratic institutions remain considerably weaker than they were before 2019.
The report paints a particularly bleak picture of the economy.
"Jammu and Kashmir's economy continues to suffer from ill-considered Union interventions which follow a start-stop pattern," it says.
It notes that unemployment in the Union Territory is now twice the national average, while the apple industry, the backbone of Kashmir's rural economy, witnessed its worst year in a decade. The report also records continuing demolition of tribal homes in alleged violation of the Forest Rights Act, arguing that vulnerable communities continue to bear the burden of administrative actions.
The Forum suggests that economic uncertainty has become intertwined with political uncertainty.
It argues that the absence of stable and accountable governance has made it difficult to formulate long-term policies on employment, investment and rural development. The result, it says, is growing frustration, particularly among young people.
That concern extends beyond Kashmir.
For the first time since its inception, the Forum devotes an extensive chapter to Ladakh, concluding that the region too is experiencing growing dissatisfaction with direct Union administration.
The report identifies the September 24, 2025, police firing on protesters as a defining moment in Ladakh's recent political history.
"The September 24 police firing on young protesters demanding statehood and/or Schedule VI status sent shockwaves across Ladakh," it says, describing the demonstrations as largely youth-led and driven by concerns over unemployment, education and the erosion of political rights. Four people were killed and around ninety injured during the protests, while environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk and more than seventy others were arrested before being released. However, the criminal cases against many protesters remain pending.
The report argues that the protests reflected a deeper sense of political exclusion rather than an isolated law-and-order problem.
It notes that negotiations between the Union Home Ministry, the Apex Body Leh and the Kargil Democratic Alliance have continued for more than three years over demands for statehood and constitutional safeguards under the Sixth Schedule. While recent discussions suggest a possible breakthrough under Article 371, the Forum says the process remains incomplete.
The report also draws attention to the weakening of institutional safeguards across Jammu and Kashmir after 2019.
Absence of Statutory Oversight Bodies
One of its strongest criticisms concerns the continued absence of independent statutory oversight bodies.
Following the constitutional changes, the Jammu and Kashmir Human Rights Commission, Women's Commission, Accountability Commission and Information Commission ceased functioning.
The Forum says it originally expected these institutions to be revived after the return of an elected government.
"Almost two years after the elected administration assumed office, none of the recommendations we had made in our previous report have been adopted," it notes.
Jammu and Kashmir still lacks a Human Rights Commission, although Union Territories are legally entitled to establish one under the Protection of Human Rights Act. Nor has the Legislative Assembly constituted a dedicated human rights committee, despite repeated recommendations from the Forum.
The report argues that this institutional vacuum has made independent monitoring of human rights significantly more difficult.
It reminds readers that the Forum itself was established after the constitutional changes precisely because official oversight mechanisms had disappeared.
"We expected that local institutions and civil society would be able to resume monitoring, seek accountability and redress initiatives, and this Forum would disband," it says.
"Given the current situation, therefore, members of the Forum have concluded that the only route to human rights protection, monitoring and accountability is for Jammu and Kashmir to regain the statehood that was snatched in August 2019."
The report also highlights concerns over freedom of expression and civic space.
It documents continued criminal proceedings against journalists, activists and political figures, while noting that social media activity increasingly attracts police scrutiny. It records cases involving journalists, politicians and academics booked under security laws, as well as the attachment of property under provisions of the UAPA. According to the Forum, these developments contribute to an atmosphere in which dissent and criticism increasingly carry legal risks.
At the same time, the report acknowledges several positive developments.
It welcomes the Jammu and Kashmir government's renewed initiative to facilitate the return of displaced Kashmiri Pandits, including the decision to revive a consultative panel involving members of the community and government representatives. The Forum expresses hope that earlier shortcomings in rehabilitation efforts can now be addressed more effectively.
PoJK Developments
In a significant departure from its earlier reports, the Forum for Human Rights in Jammu and Kashmir has, for the first time, devoted a separate chapter to developments in Pakistan-held territories of Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), arguing that any credible assessment of the region's human rights situation cannot ignore developments across the Line of Control.
The authors explain that previous editions did not include such an assessment because of the lack of reliable information and the absence of a counterpart organisation in Pakistan. They say the unprecedented wave of protests that swept Pakistan-held Jammu and Kashmir over the past year, however, made it impossible to overlook the developments.
"This year, however, there is an uprising in PoK, which is ongoing as of this writing, and news of it could not be suppressed, though it is subdued," the report notes.
The Forum traces the unrest to the protests led by the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), which began in October 2025 and intensified ahead of the July-August 2026 elections.
According to the report, the protesters demanded abolition of reserved refugee seats in the Assembly, free and fair elections, withdrawal of criminal cases against activists, and reforms relating to electricity tariffs and subsidised food. Rather than treating the agitation as an isolated event, the report presents it as another example of growing public dissatisfaction with governance in the wider Jammu and Kashmir region.
By including developments on both sides of the Line of Control, the Forum suggests that demands for democratic accountability, representative institutions and civil liberties have become common themes across the divided region, even though the political contexts remain very different.
While the report covers a broad spectrum of issues, its recommendations ultimately converge on one overriding conclusion: the restoration of full statehood.
The Forum argues that many of the problems documented during the past seven years, ranging from weakened institutions to lack of accountability, stem from the constitutional changes introduced in August 2019.
Its recommendations include restoring full statehood, expediting police reforms, reviewing cases registered under the PSA and UAPA, reinstating the Human Rights Commission, Women's Commission, Accountability Commission and Information Commission, constituting a Human Rights Committee in the Legislative Assembly, and establishing a Human Rights Commission in Ladakh.
The report also urges the government to withdraw criminal cases against peaceful protesters in Ladakh and continue dialogue with Ladakhi organisations over demands for constitutional safeguards.
Perhaps its strongest appeal, however, concerns the need to separate democratic rights from security policy.
The Forum cautions against using terrorism as a reason for indefinitely postponing restoration of statehood.
"The Union administration failed to build on the response of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to the Pahalgam attack last year—which comprised public repudiation of the terrorists and their goals," it says, adding that "the conducive environment for peacebuilding remains, albeit somewhat diminished, in which the restoration of statehood is a critical first step."
August 5 marks seven years since Parliament revoked Article 370 and Article 35A, ended Jammu and Kashmir's special constitutional status, bifurcated the former state into the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, and placed the region under direct central administration.
Since then, the constitutional changes have remained the defining fault line in political discourse.
The Union government has consistently maintained that the measures ended separatism, improved security, attracted investment and integrated Jammu and Kashmir fully with the rest of the country. It has repeatedly cited increased tourism, infrastructure development, grassroots elections and declining militancy as evidence that the policy has succeeded.
The Forum says that security alone cannot be the measure of normalcy.
Throughout the report, the authors distinguish between administrative stability and democratic legitimacy, arguing that genuine normalisation requires functioning institutions, accountable government, judicial safeguards and restoration of political rights.
The report ends on a note that sums up its broader assessment of the past seven years.
"Given the current situation," it says, "members of the Forum have concluded that the only route to human rights protection, monitoring and accountability is for Jammu and Kashmir to regain the statehood that was snatched in August 2019."
Have you liked the news article?
