At least four law enforcement personnel were killed while 20 others were injured in Azad Jammu and Kashmir’s (AJK) Rawalakot on Sunday, police said, accusing supporters of the proscribed Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) group of attacking a military-run hospital in the city.
The development takes place amid surging political tensions in AJK ahead of legislative elections scheduled to be held on July 27. The JAAC, a protest movement, has previously led demonstrations over economic grievances, governance reforms and political issues in the region. It had announced holding a massive protest throughout AJK on June 9 over non-fulfillment of its demands, the most principal once concerning the issue of reserved seats for Kashmiri refugees.
Police said the latest violence occurred on Sunday when JAAC members attacked the Combined Military Hospital (CMH) Rawalakot. It said JAAC members attacked on-duty law enforcers with firearms, including shotguns. The statement quoted AJK inspector general of police as describing the incident as an organized, armed and “terrorist” activity in which the state’s writ, the public’s peace and a medical institution were targeted.
“Due to firing by troublemaker elements of the proscribed Joint Awami Action Committee, four law enforcement personnel have been martyred while more than 20 police and other security personnel have been injured,” a statement from AJP Police said on Sunday night.
“Attack on CMH Rawalakot is not only a serious violation of the law but is also tantamount to putting the security of patients, medical staff, injured law enforcement personnel and ordinary citizens in direct danger,” the statement added.
Police warned that it would not compromise on the state’s write and peace under any circumstances.
The JAAC has so far not issued any statement in response.
REFUGEE SEATS
The JAAC wants the 12 seats in the region’s legislative assembly, reserved for refugees from Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir who settled in Pakistan after 1947, to be abolished. It alleges that these seats are often used by mainstream Pakistani political parties to influence the formation of governments in the region. Pakistan’s federal government and the JAAC held talks last week which failed to end in agreement, prompting the JAAC to announce it would go ahead with its planned protest.
Tensions flared when the AJK government formally declared JAAC a proscribed organization on June 5, placing it in the First Schedule of the AJK Anti-Terrorism Act, 2014. Police said on Saturday it arrested 72 people linked to the JAAC during a security crackdown, alleging that some of the detainees possessed weapons, suspicious documents and materials aimed at disrupting public order.
The turmoil worsened on Friday when the JAAC said one protester was killed and another core member of the group was injured in Rawalakot, the capital of Poonch district.
Meanwhile, AJK’s top court observed on Sunday that the 12 seats reserved for Kashmiri refugees have constitutional protection and cannot be removed through administrative or executive measures.
The court’s verdict came in response to a presidential reference that sought clarity on the region’s interim constitution. AJK Supreme Court Chief Justice Raja Saeed Akram Khan and Justice Khalid Yousaf Chaudhary issued an advisory opinion on Sunday, dealing a blow to the JAAC’s months-long protest movement to demand immediate abolition of the reserved seats.
“The twelve refugee seats incorporated in Article 22(1)(a)(ii) and (iii) of the Constitution can be altered, reduced, or abolished only through a constitutional amendment enacted strictly in accordance with Article 33,” the top court stated.
In its advisory, the AJK top court ruled that general elections are mandatory and must proceed within the timeframe prescribed by Article 22(4), noting that “political controversy, agitation, or disagreement over constitutional questions cannot be used as grounds to delay elections.”
The AJK government welcomed the ruling in a statement, saying that the apex court’s advice sets a clear framework by maintaining that constitutional amendments are “a solemn constitutional act, not a concession to be wrested from a government under duress.
