Opinion | Human Rights Violations in PoK & the Struggle of Its People

The protests in PoK were not about territorial slogans alone; they were about basic survival and dignity demands that should be uncontroversial in any democratic system but are treated as existential threats by Pakistan’s security apparatus.

Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) has once again become the focus of international attention due to widespread unrest and clear evidence of human rights violations. The world’s gaze has shifted to PoK not because of foreign machinations but because the people living there have taken to the streets in one of the largest demonstrations in decades, openly protesting against Pakistan’s oppressive governance that has denied them basic rights, opportunities, and dignity. The recent events highlight the grim reality faced by residents of PoK and stand in sharp contrast to the situation in Indian-administered Kashmir, where fundamental rights are safeguarded within India’s constitutional framework.

In late 2025, Pakistan-occupied Kashmir erupted in significant demonstrations led by civil society groups and local organizations such as the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee. What began as peaceful calls for basic civic rights including affordable electricity, food security, access to quality education, and improved healthcare quickly escalated into mass protests as the authorities resorted to force rather than addressing legitimate grievances. Reports indicate that hundreds of protesters marched in key towns like Muzaffarabad, Rawalakot, and Kotli, demanding that the government fulfill a comprehensive charter of 38 demands addressing economic stagnation, political representation, and social justice. Instead of responding constructively, Pakistani security forces unleashed brutal crackdowns on demonstrators. Eyewitness accounts and international media coverage documented tear gas, mass arrests, and even live fire against unarmed civilians, resulting in multiple deaths and scores of injuries. India’s Ministry of External Affairs condemned Pakistan’s actions as “horrific human rights violations,” asserting that such brutality was a “natural consequence of Pakistan’s oppressive approach and systemic plundering of resources” from territories it holds illegally.

The severity of Pakistan’s response underscores a long-standing pattern of denial of basic rights in PoK. Internet and telecommunications blackouts were imposed to suppress communication and restrict the flow of information. Educational institutions were closed, and heavy deployments of police and paramilitary units transformed residential and commercial areas into virtual zones of fear. Independent human rights observers criticized these measures, noting that they serve to silence dissent rather than ensure public safety. Beyond violent repression, the struggle in PoK reveals deeper structural issues. Locals describe how, despite the region’s abundant natural resources including hydropower potential and fertile lands Pakistan’s governance has failed to translate these assets into local prosperity. Instead, energy projects like the Mangla Dam and the Neelum-Jhelum scheme benefit central authorities while local communities face frequent blackouts, high electricity costs, and limited economic opportunity. Such systemic neglect intensifies resentment and makes the Pakistani state appear more extractive than supportive.

The recent demonstrations also included efforts to take grievances beyond regional capitals. Activists from PoK staged protests at international forums, such as the United Nations, urging the global community to pressure Pakistan to vacate the occupied territories and to allow the people of PoK to determine their own future. Banners and speeches at these gatherings condemned Islamabad’s governance policies, citing violations of universal human rights standards and demanding implementation of United Nations resolutions regarding the Kashmir dispute. Such widespread internal dissent is telling. It reveals that even within PoK people are rejecting the narrative Pakistan has promoted for generations — that it is a benevolent protector of the Kashmiri people. Instead, residents are expressing their dissatisfaction with the very state that claims to champion their cause, exposing a stark contrast between rhetoric and reality. This grassroots movement casts doubt on Pakistan’s credibility as a defender of justice and human rights.

Comparing the situation in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir with our Jammu and Kashmir further highlights the differences in governance, rights protection, and development. In India’s Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, despite challenges born of decades of conflict, citizens exercise fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. We participate in democratic elections, enjoy freedom of expression and assembly, and have access to a broad range of social services and legal protections. India’s legal system, while not perfect, provides mechanisms for redress and civil liberties that are absent under Pakistan’s control in PoK. This constitutional protection is evident in the continuous functioning of institutions, courts, and civic processes that seek to balance security with civil rights. While critics often focus on issues in Jammu & Kashmir, it is important to recognise that those issues arise within a framework where citizens have the ability to seek remedies through law, media, and civil society a reality starkly different from the repression witnessed in PoK. The protests in PoK were not about territorial slogans alone; they were about basic survival and dignity demands that should be uncontroversial in any democratic system but are treated as existential threats by Pakistan’s security apparatus. Pakistan’s governance model in PoK also reflects deeper political marginalization. Decisions on key governance issues often come from Islamabad rather than local representatives. Reserved seats, electoral manipulation, and limited autonomy contribute to widespread disillusionment among locals. When combined with rampant corruption and a lack of investment in infrastructure, the result is a disenfranchised population increasingly resentful of Pakistani control.

In contrast, India’s focus on infrastructure development, connectivity projects, and welfare schemes in Jammu and Kashmir illustrate a commitment to improving living standards and integrating the region fully into the national development agenda. Large projects like the expansion of rail connectivity and the strengthening of health and educational institutions demonstrate a governance model aimed at empowerment rather than repression. The recent unrest in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers, international organisations, and global observers. It highlights not just the immediate human rights violations which are grave enough but a systemic failure of governance that has denied an entire population the rights and opportunities they deserve. The violent suppression of protests, the denial of basic freedoms, and the economic neglect of the region are hallmarks of a state that prioritises control over compassion and authority over accountability.

For India, the situation in PoK reinforces long-standing claims about the illegitimate nature of Pakistan’s occupation. New Delhi’s diplomatic efforts have called on the international community to hold Pakistan accountable for its actions and to acknowledge the aspirations of Kashmiris for peace, development, and rights.

The people of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir raise a simple but profound demand: the right to live with dignity, justice, and freedom rights that are readily available to all Indians through democratic processes and legal protections. It remains to be seen whether Pakistan will choose repression or reform, but the courage of PoK’s citizens in demanding their rights speaks louder than any authoritarian decree. Their struggle is not just for PoK; it is a testament to the universal human longing for justice, something that India stands firmly in support of.

(aatifahmad2026@gmail.com)