Friday June 14, 2024

Indian army chief has exposed himself to war crimes: JKCHR

By our correspondents
February 20, 2017


Jammu and Kashmir Council for Human Rights (JKCHR) has stated that the statement of Indian Army chief to treat Kashmiris as “anti-nationals and they will face harsh actions” for supporting militants has no merit and any military action against the civilians or any State Subject would be a war crime. Indian army mandate in Kashmir has expired and it is an occupation force today. People of Kashmir and the UN have a right to consider all means to vacate the Indian occupation, says a press release.

JKCHR President Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani has stated that there are two disciplines which control the Indian Army’s presence in the Indian occupied Kashmir part of disputed State of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian Army’s admission into Jammu and Kashmir is conditional. It is a sub-ordinate army and is a supplement to the forces of Jammu and Kashmir. There is an agreement dated October 27, 1947 between the Government of India and the Government of Jammu and Kashmir that the accession would be referred to the vote of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

After over two months India in a hope that it would frustrate the vote on accession (as promised) took the matter to the United Nations on 01 January 1948. It filed a complaint against Pakistan hoping to have Pakistan declared aggressor during the debates at the UN Security Council. India failed in her calculations. Pakistan filed a counter defence and Indian atrocities against Muslims in India became a regular reference at the UNSC debates on Kashmir. Indian hope to wriggle out at the UN Security Council failed.

India conceded at the UN SC that people of Kashmir were free to pull out from their accession with India (which was to be referred to a vote) and UN SC finalised a mechanism to supervise a free and fair referendum in Jammu and Kashmir.

Dr. Nazir Gilani has said that Indian Army has a role to maintain law and order in the process of a UN supervised referendum. This role was in reference to early periods of UN in 1948 and the early times of the three Kashmiri Governments at Srinagar, Muzaffarabad and Gilgit-Baltistan. Pakistan and United Nations became the parties. Therefore, presence of Indian army for a law and order need could be revised and outsourced to the United Nations or the three Kashmiri Governments.

JKCHR statement adds that UN Security Council resolution of 21 April 1948 has put restraints on the behaviour, number and location of Indian army in Jammu and Kashmir. Indian army has outlived its purpose and tenure in Kashmir. It has violated the life, property and honour of the people of Kashmir. It has violated the restraints placed on it by the UN. Therefore Indian army is an ‘occupation’ force in Kashmir.

Dr. Nazir Gilani has said that Indian army chief has no mandate in Kashmir and his statement has no merit. The injury that would follow army chief’s statement, shall expose him to incur the attention of International Criminal Court for committing war crimes. There is need to report Indian Army Chief General Bipin Rawat to the UN Security Council, UN General Assembly and ICC. He should be tracked during his travels abroad by instituting cases of committing human rights violations against the people of Jammu and Kashmir.