The Pulse | Politics | South Asia

What the Banning of the JAAC Reveals About Power in Azad Kashmir

The ban may remove JAAC from the formal political arena, but it cannot remove the grievances that brought it into existence.

An aerial view of Muzaffarabad, the capital and largest city in Pakistani-administered Azad Kashmir.

Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) is currently in the midst of a rapidly unfolding political crisis. As a territory-wide wheel-jam strike called by the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) gets underway, internet and mobile data services have been suspended in several areas, examinations postponed, and additional Pakistani security forces deployed across multiple districts. 

These developments come days after the AJK government designated JAAC a proscribed organization under anti-terrorism legislation, coinciding with the opening of nomination filings for legislative elections expected to be held on July 27. 

While the situation remains fluid, the turmoil gripping Pakistan-administered Kashmir reflects far more than a dispute over a strike or public order. It has exposed deeper tensions over political representation, governance, and the nature of power in a territory where local politics have long been shaped by decisions made beyond its borders.

The decision to ban JAAC marks a remarkable turn in the movement’s trajectory. Over the past two years, the committee emerged from a loose coalition of traders, lawyers, transporters, students, and civil society activists into arguably the most influential grassroots political force in AJK. Initially mobilized around rising electricity tariffs, inflation, and governance failures, it has gradually evolved into a platform through which a broad cross-section of society can articulate frustrations with the territory’s political establishment.

The movement’s rise reflected a growing crisis of confidence in traditional political actors. For decades, AJK’s political landscape has been dominated by branches of Pakistan’s mainstream parties, primarily the Pakistan Peoples Party, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, and a pro-establishment national party, the Muslim Conference. Elections are regularly held, governments change hands, and democratic institutions formally function. Yet many residents increasingly perceive these institutions as disconnected from local concerns and overly dependent on political calculations made in Islamabad.

This perception is not merely a matter of political rhetoric. AJK occupies a unique constitutional position in which local governance exists alongside significant federal influence. While the territory possesses an elected assembly and government, major political developments have often mirrored shifts in Pakistan’s national political landscape. Governments in Muzaffarabad have historically depended on support structures that extend well beyond the territory itself, reinforcing the belief among many Kashmiris that ultimate political authority lies elsewhere.

For years, this arrangement remained largely uncontested. Mainstream parties mediated between society and the state, absorbing public grievances while maintaining the existing political framework. JAAC has disrupted that equilibrium.

Unlike traditional political parties, JAAC has not sought electoral office. It has derived its legitimacy from public mobilization and its ability to force authorities to respond to its demands. Through sustained protests and negotiations, the movement succeeded in compelling both the federal and regional governments to address long-standing grievances. These include demands related to electricity tariffs, governance reforms, educational restructuring, public services, compensation mechanisms, and administrative changes. Islamabad also pledged substantial funding to improve AJK’s electricity infrastructure.

In doing so, JAAC demonstrated that meaningful political influence could be exercised outside the territory’s established party system.

For its proponents, this transformed the committee into more than a protest movement. It became an alternative vehicle of political representation at a time when public trust in conventional institutions appeared increasingly fragile. In effect, JAAC evolved into a parallel political actor, capable of mobilizing public opinion, shaping policy debates, and negotiating directly with the authorities.

The confrontation escalated when the movement expanded its focus from economic grievances to institutional questions. The most contentious issue concerned the 12 seats reserved in the AJK Legislative Assembly for refugees from Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir residing in Pakistan.

These seats have long been one of the most distinctive features of AJK’s political system. Supporters argue that they provide representation to displaced Kashmiris and preserve the broader political character of the Kashmir dispute. Critics, however, contend that they have become a mechanism through which Pakistan-based political parties influence government formation in Muzaffarabad.

Although the refugee constituencies are located outside AJK, they have frequently played a decisive role in shaping political outcomes within the territory. JAAC’s demand for their abolition therefore challenged not merely a constitutional provision but a political arrangement that has historically linked AJK’s internal politics with Pakistan’s broader power structure.

It is telling that negotiations between JAAC and authorities reportedly made progress on dozens of issues but repeatedly stalled on the refugee-seat question. While economic and administrative reforms proved negotiable, demands touching the foundations of political power proved considerably more difficult to accommodate.

The state’s response to JAAC’s growing influence was not limited to negotiations. Over recent months, a parallel battle unfolded in the media.

As the movement gained momentum, sections of Pakistan’s electronic media and a network of pro-establishment commentators increasingly portrayed JAAC through the........

© The Diplomat