The deadline issued by the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC) to the Pakistan government for meeting its demands of cancelling the added taxes on electricity bills expired on December 20. It was expected that on December 21 the JKJAAC would be leading protests all over Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) and electricity bills would be burned at the gates of PoJK legislative assembly in Muzaffarabad.
On the afternoon of December 20, representatives of the Pakistan government held negotiations with the delegation of the JKJAAC in Islamabad. The outcome was announced in a video message through social media in which leaders of the JKJAAC said that the negotiation was a success and almost all their demands had been accepted except the cancellation of taxes on electricity bills.
The message was received with mixed feelings by those who have been part of the civil disobedience movement since August 31. Hundreds of thousands of PoJK consumers of electricity had been refusing to pay their electricity bills, costing the PoJK treasury a monthly loss of up to Rs 3 billion. How did JKJAAC conclude that the negotiation was a success when their primary demand was not met? On the contrary, the Pakistan authorities asked for an extended two weeks to sort the matter.
JKJAAC not only accepted that but gave the government an extra five days. As a ‘goodwill’ gesture the JKJAAC announced that the original plan to burn electricity bills in Muzaffarabad on December 21 has been withdrawn but the boycott campaign will continue till a settlement with the government of Pakistan is reached.
As JKJAAC was in Islamabad, holding talks with the authorities, at that very moment Pakistan increased the tariff on electricity by Rs 1.15 per unit, adding an extra burden of Rs 22.99 billion to the consumers. In my opinion it was naive of the JKJAAC to hold negotiations with the Pakistani authorities until demands were met.
Second, Pakistan is using delaying tactics to frustrate the civil disobedience movement by gaining two weeks of ‘truce’ which will damage the momentum of the boycott electricity bills campaign. During my conversation with PoJK exiled dissident and author Dr Shabbir Chaudhary, he said: “Sadly, the representatives of the JKJAAC failed to discharge responsibilities and protect genuine demands and fundamental rights of the suffering people of (PoJK).”
Dr Chaudhary said that the JKJAAC “should demand that there be a national grid in (PoJK) and all electricity produced (around 4000MW) must go to (PoJK) national grid instead of the Pakistan national grid”. He was of the opinion that the JKJAAC’s demands should include control of all dams built in PoJK and be brought under the control of the PoJK government. Dr Chaudhary regarded the December 20 agreement between the Pakistan authorities and JKJAAC as ‘vague’. He advised the JKJAAC to “induct some experts who can help and advise them”.
The point is that JKJAAC lacks clarity on the final goal which should be total independence from Pakistan that would lead any future government in PoJK to exercise control over its natural resources. The leadership of JKJAAC is not of reformist nature. Therefore, unless the leadership of JKJAAC changes, the opportunistic character of its political expression will not change. This is a contradiction that is fast becoming a matter of life and death for a civil disobedience movement one is witnessing in PoJK in 75 years.
Dr Amjad Ayub Mirza is an author and a broadcaster from Mirpur in PoJK. He currently lives in the UK. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
Comments
0 comment