[Reader-list] Why should I vote?

[Khurram Parvez]

Why should I vote?
By Zahir-ud-Din [Kashmir Times] 

I am in a fix. Should I vote or 
not? The question haunts me day and night. The government urges me through paid 
advertisements in local dailies to wake up and vote as it would solve all my 
problems. The dissidents on the other hand tell me to stay away from the booths. 
What shall I do? I decided to look in the history of Kashmir to have a better 
understanding of the issue. 

I am told an elected government would 
improve the standard of education, create new avenues of employment, protect 
environment, restore supremacy of judiciary and also provide a clean 
administration. The history, however, falsifies these claims. We are told that 
the successive 'democratic? governments persuaded the people to seek education. 
Yes, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah founded the University of Jammu and Kashmir at 
Hazratbal. A few colleges were also founded during Bakshi?s regime. But did it 
make education popular? The state of Jammu Kashmir is still far behind than most 
the states in India as far as literacy rate is concerned. What did the elected 
governments, therefore, do? After signing the Indra-Abdullah accord, 
Sher-e-Kashmir banned Jama?t-e- Islami run schools. More than fifty thousand 
students suffered. Many of them had to abandon studies as no 'secular? school 
was ready to admit them. 

On the contrary, Maharaja Hari Singh made 
education compulsory in early 30s. Parents were forced to send their children to 
the school or face consequences. A Muslim Conference worker, Muhammad Yusuf Khan 
of Balgarden, Srinagar who fought the Maharaja narrates his experience. ?I was 
sent by my father in a factory where I used to weave shawls. One day I was taken 
by my father to the school. I was given books and stationary printed in England. 
I was given a piece of cloth for my uniform along with a one rupee note to get 
it stitched. In addition I was given soap and told to bathe daily? These schools 
were called Jabri (forced) schools. The students of these schools managed the 
affairs of the state for quite some time. 

Maharaja's interest in 
education is reflected by his invitation to Qudratullah Shuhaab. He secured 
first position in an international essay competition. As soon as Maharaja heard 
about it, he invited Shuhaab over a cup of tea and encouraged him. (Shuhaab 
Nama) 
As far as supremacy of judiciary is concerned, the Maharaja proved 
more prudent than the 'elected' rulers. In early 40s Maharani Tara Devi's driver 
was booked for a minor traffic offence. The Maharani wrote a letter to the 
concerned judge requesting him to deal with her driver leniently. The learned 
judge informed the Maharaja who scolded the Maharani and tendered an apology to 
the judge. But when Sher-e-Kashmir assumed power, a Halqa president of National 
Conference in Budgam district wrote a note to a high court judge urging him not 
to hear a second appeal. The learned Justice informed Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah 
of the development. Sher-e-Kashmir responded: 'We are in a state of emergency. 
Do as you have been told or quit.' The learned Justice resigned in protest. This 
is how the process of eroding the supremacy of judiciary was initiated. (As 
narrated by noted lawyer, columnist and author GN Gauhar.) 

The trend 
continues even today. A police officer decides whether a court order seeking 
release of a political prisoner should be honoured or not. The home department 
created history in July 2000 by issuing a written order urging the jail 
superintendents not to honour court orders seeking release of political 
prisoners. The order was withdrawn after fifteen days when the lawyers 
registered strong protest. However, it is still being followed in letter and 
spirit. Early this year the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budgam while hearing 
Jalil Andrabi?s case observed: 'The people are justified in casting aspersions 
on the judiciary.' 

There is no denying the fact that the Maharaja 
ordered arrest of the people but gave them a fair trial. The Maharaja had the 
vein to cancel the exile orders of Said-ud-Din Shawl and his colleague. The duo 
was exiled in 1924. The elected rulers on the other hand resorted to 
undemocratic methods to silence dissent. Thousands of activists were exiled 
during Sher-e-Kashmir's and Bakshi's regime. Strangely enough a police officer 
would issue such orders. 

During Maharaja's 'autocratic' rule nobody was 
subjected to enforced disappearance, nobody was killed after arrest, nobody was 
eliminated in a fake encounter. But in democratic rule more than eight thousand 
people were subjected to enforced disappearanceand custodial killings became the 
order of the day. 
The 'elected' rulers also extended Defence of India Rules 
(DIR) to the state. Thousands of activists were detained for years together 
without trial under these rules. Sher-e-Kashmir Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah framed 
the infamous Public Safety Act (PSA) 1978. Much has been said and written on 
this draconian legislation. No further explanation, therefore, is needed here. 
The process did not stop here. In 1984 Ghulam Muhammad Shah dethroned Dr Farooq 
Abdullah with New Delhi's help and extended another draconian legislation 
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA) 1985 to the state. 


The special status of the state was eroded slowly and silently. Way back 
in 1959 Article 238 which contained the heart and soul of Article 370 was 
omitted from Indian constitution. In absence of Article 238, Article 370 has no 
meaning. Soon after the permit system was also abolished. Today people are 
talking about restoration of autonomy. How can the people swallow such a pill? 

In 1996 when Dr Farooq assumed power for the third time he wasted no time 
and carved out the ruthless Special Operations Group (SOG). The SOG wreaked 
havoc in the entire state. Soon after he extended POTO (Prevention of Terrorism 
Ordinance) when it was still an ordinance. Jammu Kashmir thus became the first 
state to invoke the provisions of the draconian law. 

Mufti Muhammad 
Sayed and Ghulam Nabi Azad did the maximum damage to the unity and harmony of 
the state so much so that division on communal lines seems quite imminent. Only 
a miracle can hold the state together now. 

Coming to employment. Instead 
of creating new avenues of employment, the successive democratic governments 
strangulated the public sector. Most of the corporations are ailing today. The 
prestigious State Road Transport Corporation (SRTC) is at the verge of collapse. 
The Agro Industries Development Corporation is on the death bed. The Cheshma 
Shahi's milk plant has already died down. The other corporations have a similar 
story to tell. A study conducted by a university student reveals that the 
corporations failed because the authorities got their party workers, relatives 
and friends adjusted in them without taking in to consideration the capacity of 
the corporations. 

I am also promised better roads. By now it has become 
clear that the elected governments are not capable of making good roads. The 
state got the best roads during Jagmohan's 'undemocratic' rule. The roads 
constructed by him still exist. 

Environmental preservation has been 
confined to Dal Lake by the elected rulers. In the name of saving Dal public 
funds are looted anything. The results are obvious. Dal is dying fast and so are 
the forests. A retired tourism official preferring anonymity showed some rare 
documents to me. The documents reveal that Maharaja was very much concerned 
about the environment. In his regime the forests were not plundered. Dal had not 
lost its glitter and Wular had not shrunk dangerously. 

I am also told 
that elections would lead to resolution of the Kashmir conflict. How? The 
politicians alone know. Nobody must oppose a democratic exercise for the sake of 
it. But the government of India, the government of Pakistan and the 
international community have time and again made clear that elections in Indian 
administered Jammu Kashmir and Pakistan administered Jammu Kashmir will have no 
bearing on the status of the conflict. Elections could not solve the problem in 
six decades. How can it lead to resolution now when equations have changed the 
world over?

By now it has become clear that the state was well off during 
the 'autocratic? and undemocratic rule. Why should I, therefore, vote? Can 
anybody convince me? 

Feed back at din.zahir at gmail.com