Opinion | Votes in the Shadow of Boots

Democracy on the Ballot in Gilgit Baltistan but Questions Remain About Who Really Decides

On June 7, 2026, voters across the rugged mountains and valleys of Gilgit Baltistan will head to polling stations to cast their ballots in regional elections. While the electoral process represents a familiar democratic exercise, many residents approach it with a sense of uncertainty, wondering whether their votes will genuinely determine the outcome or whether decisions have already been made elsewhere. This lingering doubt reflects a broader concern about the nature of democracy in a region that remains politically and constitutionally unresolved.

Gilgit Baltistan, often celebrated for its stunning landscapes and strategic location at the meeting point of the Karakoram, Himalayas, and Hindu Kush mountain ranges, occupies a unique position within Pakistan. Although Islamabad refers to it as a provisional province, the region has never been fully incorporated into Pakistan’s constitutional framework. Its immense strategic significance has often placed it at the center of national security considerations, making democratic representation a secondary concern in the eyes of many observers.

The region serves as the gateway to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship infrastructure project connecting China’s Xinjiang region with Pakistan and the Arabian Sea. Because of this strategic importance, decision making in Gilgit Baltistan is often viewed as being driven more by federal and security interests than by local democratic aspirations. Critics argue that maintaining the region outside Pakistan’s constitutional structure allows authorities to exercise greater control while limiting the political influence of its residents.

Against this backdrop, the June 7 elections are being viewed by many not merely as a routine electoral contest but as a significant test of democratic credibility. Allegations surrounding the electoral process have intensified concerns about fairness and transparency. Among the most controversial issues has been the denial of the election symbol of Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf and later the removal of the symbol of a PTI allied party. Since a large number of voters in Pakistan rely on party symbols for identification, particularly in areas where literacy levels remain low, critics argue that such measures place affected candidates at a considerable disadvantage even if they are technically allowed to contest elections as independents.

PTI leaders have alleged that administrative pressure was exerted on candidates to abandon the party and join groups perceived to have official backing. The party also claimed that several senior leaders, including Secretary General Salman Akram Raja, were prevented from entering Gilgit Baltistan and were escorted out of the region, while local supporters who gathered to welcome them were detained. According to PTI, these actions resemble restrictions imposed during Pakistan’s controversial general elections of February 2024, the results of which remain disputed by many opposition supporters.

Political tensions further increased when PTI leader Junaid Akbar Khan and several lawmakers were reportedly stopped at a police checkpoint in Ghizer district while returning from campaign activities. At the same time, leaders from rival political parties continued to address public gatherings across the region without apparent restrictions. Critics pointed to this contrast as evidence of unequal treatment, while government officials maintained that all actions were taken in accordance with the law.

The role of Pakistan’s military establishment in politics has long been a subject of debate both within Pakistan and internationally. In Gilgit Baltistan, many analysts argue that the influence of security institutions has historically been particularly significant. Local journalists and political observers have repeatedly raised concerns about the independence of institutions responsible for overseeing elections and governance in the region. Reports of increased pressure on opposition leaders and activists during the election campaign have further fueled these concerns.

Adding to the debate was the deployment of more than 5,000 Punjab Police personnel for election duty. While authorities described the deployment as a routine security measure intended to ensure peaceful polling, opposition groups questioned whether such a large deployment was necessary and whether similar arrangements had been made during previous elections. Government representatives strongly rejected allegations of interference and insisted that the electoral process would remain free and fair.

Public opinion surveys conducted in the region have suggested substantial support for PTI. In the 2020 Gilgit Baltistan elections, PTI won 16 of the 24 general seats, securing a two thirds majority and becoming the first party in the region’s history to achieve such a result. However, political developments that followed led to the eventual collapse of the PTI led government. In July 2023, Chief Minister Khalid Khurshid was disqualified following a court ruling related to allegations concerning his educational qualifications. While supporters of the decision viewed it as a lawful judicial action, critics argued that the timing and consequences carried broader political implications.

Beyond electoral controversies lies a deeper constitutional issue. Residents of Gilgit Baltistan do not participate in Pakistan’s national elections and have no representation in the Senate or National Assembly. Although the region is administered by Islamabad, its people continue to lack many of the political rights enjoyed by citizens in Pakistan’s constitutionally recognized provinces. This constitutional ambiguity remains one of the most significant grievances voiced by local communities and political activists.

India has also objected to the elections, reiterating its longstanding position that Gilgit Baltistan forms part of the larger Jammu and Kashmir region that legally acceded to India in 1947. Indian officials have argued that electoral exercises conducted by Pakistan cannot obscure concerns relating to political rights, governance, and human rights in the territory. Regardless of differing positions on sovereignty, discussions about representation and political rights remain central to debates surrounding the region’s future.

The June 7 elections therefore carry significance beyond local politics. They represent a broader test of democratic institutions and political accountability in a region that has long existed in a state of constitutional uncertainty. Many residents fear that their voices may once again be overshadowed by forces beyond their control, while others hope the electoral process will provide an opportunity for genuine political expression.

PTI leaders have warned that any perceived manipulation of the election results could trigger widespread protests. Former National Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser stated that the party would challenge any outcome it considered unfair and suggested that PTI’s decision not to launch a stronger protest movement after the 2024 general elections had been a mistake.

For centuries, the mountains of Gilgit Baltistan have witnessed the rise and fall of empires, the movement of traders along ancient routes, and the transformation of political boundaries. The people of the region are fully aware of the challenges confronting their democracy and remain attentive to every development. Whatever verdict emerges from the ballot boxes, the events surrounding these elections are likely to leave a lasting impression on the political consciousness of Gilgit Baltistan and shape discussions about democracy, representation, and governance for years to come.

drrashid2980@gmail.com