Make polls credible in Kashmir

The fudging of DNA of the victims of killing by security forces shows the insensitivity and deliberate disregard of all standards of state behaviour. This has been rudely brought to the forefront by the shameful gang rape by three BSF personnel of a young girl of Kullar (Pahalgam). No doubt the personnel have been arrested. But to instill confidence, the court martial must be concluded within a month and the guilty given maximum imprisonment. I would also like the head of the BSF to publicly apologise to the family in front of the villagers. If, because of the crime by a state agency, the family wishes to shift to another place, the state should bear all the expenses for resettling the family. Only then can the apology be meaningful.

The PM’s visit would set a responsive chord if he could assure the public and the various leaders who would be meeting him that swift and penal action against security forces committing excesses will be taken without being overwhelmed by a false premise that any action taken against the security forces would demoralise them. In fact, studies all over the world have shown that permitting security forces to commit excesses and without being answerable for their action is not only bad for the morale of the security forces itself but is certain to create a hostile reaction in the public with the result that any mutual worthwhile discussion is ruled out.

Further, the PM should make a public reiteration that the elections will be totally free and fair so as to enable people’s representatives to be elected with whom the government would hold talks without any preconditions from either side. But this promise of fair elections, which is made in all genuineness, will not carry conviction if the only supervisory machinery will be the Election Commission of India along with the J&K government.

The Election Commission should be realistic enough to accept that the elections held in J&K under its supervision in the past are unanimously considered to have been of doubtful fairness. The only exception is the 1977 elections. That is why there is a need for non-official observers.

It has been made clear to the Election Commission that these non-official observers will not have any power to interfere with the actual polling or polling machinery. All that is being suggested is that they be authorised by the commission so that they can observe all aspects of the polling.

A fairly objective mechanism for selection has even been suggested namely, the Election Commission could request the former prime ministers to suggest names of non-official observers. This suggestion will be a guarantee of impartially and the Commission would not be apprehensive of being accused of bias in favour of any particular NGO. The Central government should also permit SAARC non-official observers and the international media to have access to the election process. The British Foreign Secretary’s presumptuous reference to Kashmir may be open to objection but his comment about the need of neutral observers cannot be faulted. There is nothing unusual in such a course. I myself have been an observer of SAARC NGO Group in the last elections held in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal.

If the forthcoming elections are not accepted by the world at large, as being fair, the Kashmiri youth may be pushed back to the Nineties, when militancy was at its highest. It is hoped that the Hurriyat and other groups would be realistic enough to appreciate that their non-participation would mean their banishment to oblivion for the next decade.

The writer is a former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court