Democracy forms the core of India’s identity, permeating every facet of life in the nation. We are certainly not China. The principles of democracy played a pivotal role in our struggle for independence, and following our nation’s liberation, they became the fundamental principles shaping our public life. As we have constructed a new Parliament building, it is crucial to always remember that the most revered entity within this temple of democracy is none other than democracy itself.
When we talk of democracy, it cannot be imagined without a system of free and fair elections. Despite the numerous challenges still present in its electoral landscape, India can justifiably take pride in having built one of the most respected electoral systems among democratic nations globally. However, reaching this level of fairness was a challenging journey, demanding substantial efforts to implement electoral reforms. One prominent figure who stands out in this endeavour is the late T N Seshan, an iconoclast who played a pivotal role in eradicating malpractices from our electoral system. His dedication ensured that dishonest practices had no foothold in our elections, contributing significantly to the integrity of India’s democratic process. Seshan could succeed because the underlying spirit of his actions has been the rule of law and he did everything possible to eradicate the rule of fear in Indian elections. In other words, free and fair elections can never be held in an atmosphere of fear — that is what guided the spirit of reforms initiated by Seshan, which we may call Seshanism.
In a recent hearing on the abrogation of Article 370, the Supreme Court of India enjoined the central government to conduct Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir. This assertion aligns with the principles of our democratic system, as it is the government’s responsibility to ensure the proper functioning of democratic processes.
However, there are critical questions that need addressing.
First, we must assess whether the political and security situation in Jammu and Kashmir is conducive to free and fair elections. Have we successfully eliminated external influences that used to interfere with public affairs and democratic processes before the abrogation of Article 370?
Second, can we realistically expect the central government to completely eradicate the long-standing influences from Pakistan, spanning over 75 years, in the region? Have we indeed moved from secessionism, which created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, to Seshanism, an embodiment of fairness and the rule of law?
Third, considering the significant external pressure and the lingering fear of violence, have elections in Kashmir genuinely been free and fair in recent times?
These questions demand objective answers before we proceed with the electoral process in Jammu and Kashmir, ensuring that the upcoming elections are conducted in a manner that upholds the principles of fairness and democracy.
Our country faces a dilemma when it comes to Jammu and Kashmir. While we cherish our democratic values and consider elections an essential part of our political and social fabric, we cannot turn a blind eye to the harsh realities on the ground in that region. These realities were a driving force behind the decision to revoke Article 370.
Since August 2019, considerable progress has been made in J&K, including the systematic degradation of secessionist and terrorist networks. The administration is resolute in eradicating this system entirely, but it is a process that will take time.
As long as secessionist ideologies and their support structures persist, even in weakened states, they can influence mainstream politics in Kashmir and alter the electoral landscape, as they have historically done. Additionally, the persistent threat of violence and the involvement of terrorists has in the past complicated the electoral dynamics in the region. This complex situation necessitates careful consideration and strategic planning as we move forward.
In the early Nineties, as Pakistan-sponsored organised terrorism began to take hold, the central government took control of Jammu and Kashmir in January 1990, a situation that persisted until November 1996. The government’s initial goal was to hold elections in the region, driven by a genuine desire to serve national interests. However, this endeavour inadvertently led to the establishment of a compromised governance system. This system was forced to appease elements with allegiances to Pakistan due to the pervasive fear created by terrorists.
Under the constant threat of terrorism, the governance system operated in an atmosphere of fear, and elections were conducted under these challenging conditions. Political separatist groups, bolstered by the influence of armed insurgents and street violence, came to set the agenda for discussions within the Legislative Assembly. It became common for the majority of the J&K Assembly’s proceedings to revolve around contentious issues like self-rule, dual currency, autonomy, self-determination, and soft separatism. Delhi-bashing became the norm, and competitive secessionism became a prominent theme.
There still exists an underlying fear of secessionist-terrorist intimidation, and if this fear isn’t completely eradicated before conducting elections, there’s a significant risk of reverting to a hybrid governance structure in Jammu and Kashmir that prioritises the interests of our adversary at the cost of the Indian exchequer.
To uphold the principles of “Seshanism”, it is imperative that we establish a fair and unbiased electoral environment, free from any influence related to national interests or security concerns. Electoral competition should revolve around individuals and parties, without being tainted by external factors.
Historically, due to a combination of compromise, deceit, fear, favouritism, intimidation, and propaganda, the choices available to the people have been severely restricted. Therefore, it is essential to broaden the spectrum of choice, ensuring they are devoid of secessionist and terrorist influences. We still need to provide security cover to people foraying in electoral politics.
Overt and covert manipulation of the electoral process would only result in the emergence of hybrid regimes, resembling the situation in Pakistan where the amalgam of gun, baton and vote rules the country. This is something that should not be permitted in Jammu and Kashmir. Instead, the democratic culture prevailing in the region should align with core Indian democratic values. Let’s not leave the task in J&K unfinished.
The writer is a research associate with Policy Perspectives Foundation and is pursuing PhD from Bennett University
