“Human Rights Violation in Indian Occupied Kashmir: A Case

Study of Modi Era”

Introduction:
Since the partition of the Indian Subcontinent in 1947 and the beginning of the Indo-Pakistani
conflict, the control of Kashmir acquired an identity-related, symbolic significance to both India
and Pakistan. Although the ongoing dispute consumes many resources which could otherwise be
diverted into socio-economic development and remains a major hurdle in the normalization of
bilateral relations, the chances for its resolution are severely limited. The major victims of the
protracted belligerence are the residents of the disputed area, divided for decades, currently
administered by India and Pakistan. There is an abundance of material written on the history and
intractability of the Kashmir conflict, which investigates it from the perspective of Indo-
Pakistani enmity and focuses on their conflicting narratives and profoundly limited chances for
peaceful resolution. At the same time, more academic deliberations provide an in-depth analysis
of the narratives within all parts of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir (PSJ&K),
currently administered by India and Pakistan. They include the Kashmir Valley, Jammu and
Ladakh (administered by India), and Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan (administered
by Pakistan). All these regions have their own historic specificity and complex religious and
socio-cultural diversity, the analysis of which goes well beyond the spectrum of this article, yet
these factors have to be briefly and selectively invoked in the context of the geostrategic
dynamics, India’s and Pakistan’s policies vis-à-vis these territories, and in particular, how they
are governed and politically projected by the respective central governments. Consequently, this
study will briefly refer to the situation in all parts of the erstwhile PSJ&K, understanding the
term “Kashmir” in a broader spectrum. Contrary to a narrative that appears in many political
science analyses of the dispute, the Kashmir situation is not only a territorial bone of contention
between India and Pakistan. It is a complex set of diverse power rivalries and discourses on
regional, bilateral, and sub-local levels, engaging various state and non-state actors, civil society
activists, and other representatives of local communities, who try to materialize their
prerogatives or express their grievances. The dispute should also be regarded as a historically
inherited, ideological, emotional centre piece of the state-led, intentionally nurtured nationalisms,
with artificially projected and politicized communal Hindu-Muslim rhetoric taking inspiration
from the pre-partition times, often serving as a tool for belligerent mobilization on both sides of
the border. The article briefly assesses the situation in all sections of the former Princely State of
Jammu and Kashmir (henceforth PSJ&K), now administered by India and Pakistan. Presently,
Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir(IaJK) includes the Kashmir Valley and Jammu
(forming the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, UTJ&K) and Ladakh (now the Union
Territory of Ladakh, UTL). The common narrative on Kashmir tends to equate Kashmir with the
Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley as it is the centre piece of the anti-India insurgency, where the
inhabitants’ rights are systematically abused by the Indian armed forces and jihadist militants.
Nonetheless, in order to provide a glimpse into the unprecedented sub-regional diversity within
the former State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K, which existed until its division into two UTs in
2019), the article goes beyond the Kashmir Valley and briefly looks at Jammu and Ladakh.
Pakistani-administered Jammu and Kashmir (PaJK) consists of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK)
and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB). Both of these regions are strategically crucial in the regional
geopolitical dynamics, which includes the Sino-Pakistani alliance, and consequently, they are
strictly controlled by the Pakistani central authorities (AJK and GB do not have provincial
status).

In 2019, the BJP government revoked Article 370 of the Constitution which abolished the
special status of Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK). In 2020, the Indian government passed a
domicile law that led to significant changes in the demographics of Kashmir. These legislations
have a blatant disregard for the Indian Constitution and the rights of Kashmiris, who will become
the minority in their land. These developments have further deteriorated relations between India
and Pakistan. Pakistan gave a “new political map” under which IOk is shown as part of Pakistan
territory. Both countries achieved independence seventy-five years ago from British colonialism,
but could not coexist peacefully since then. The bilateral relationship between both countries is
marred by the Kashmir issue. Since independence, Kashmiris have been denied basic human
rights including the right to choose and the right to life. India has pursued hard-lined policies to
suppress the right to self-determination of the Kashmiri people. The right to self-determination is
regarded as a fundamental right in the United Nations Charter. This right is also protected by the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UNSC has passed several
resolutions on the Kashmir issue, none of which could be implemented due to India’s false
promises and obstinate approach. India has been suppressing the freedom struggle in Kashmir
using various methods. It has committed killings, brutalities, rapes, and forced detention under
the veil of draconian Acts and Laws. IOK is one of the world’s highly militarized zones. India
has always refused to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Kashmir issue due to which peace
between both countries has become a far-off reality. In this paper, the researcher enquires about
India’s illegitimate occupation of Kashmir and gross human rights violations in recent years.

Among the central questions to be answered by this study is how these ideological tools are
manifested and what is their impact on the dynamics of animosity, particularly after the
bifurcation of Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir. The key assumption is that the debate
on such a complex, multi-layered challenge as the Kashmir issue needs to be recontextualised
with the aim being to unpack the diverse interconnections between the regional and local power
politics and human rights/ grievances of the indigenous inhabitants of the disputed region.

Research Objectives:

The research objectives are:

1. To what extent have human rights been violated in Indian-Occupied Kashmir in Modi
era?

2. How the government policies and security measures affected the human rights situation
in the region?

3. What role have state and non-state actors played in contributing to human rights abuses?

Research Questions:

1. Examine the nature and extent of human rights violations in India-Occupied Kashmir
during the Modi era.

2. Analyze the impact of government policies, legal reforms, security measures, and
military operations on the human rights situation in the region.

3. Investigate the role of state and non-state actors in contributing to human rights abuses.

Theoretical Framework:
To develop a thorough understanding of the Kashmir dispute and the violation of human rights
by India, numerous theoretical concepts has been used. In contrast to the realities on the ground,
the Indian lobby's propaganda plays a key role in how the Kashmir dispute is portrayed in global
political discourse. According to this hypothesis, security is a social phenomenon that is built on
norms, beliefs, and ideology. To construct anything, according to Karin Fierke, is to create a
topic or entity that wouldn't otherwise exist. This concept of security can be seen plainly in the
way that India intervened in Kashmir. Indian security forces perceived Muslims in Kashmir as a
danger, thereby they subjected them to various forms of brutality. Constructivism emphasizes a
blend of philosophical and critical methods, as articulated from a realist viewpoint, which holds
that the constructivism theory places more emphasis on norms than on security related power
politics. Furthermore, they originate from the premise that security is a social phenomenon. The
realist view of IR, which holds that governments are rational players with an insatiable thirst for
authority and supremacy can provide another rationale for the Kashmir dispute. Hence, when
considering the Kashmir issue while bearing in mind the neo-realist notion, the matter can be
regarded as a contest for dominance and control between Pakistan and India, regardless of the
worry about the welfare of the Kashmiris. This idea was first established by the scholar
Thucydides in 430–406 BC as part of his examination of the depiction of power struggles as an
accepted norm of human behavior. This widely held view of realism holds that 'dominance' is the
primary factor that is linked to existence and self-interest. Over the years, realism has been
divided into three primary sub-categories: classical, structural, and neo-realism. Regardless of
the numerous divides within realism, the main elements—statism, survival, and self-help—
remain consistent. Neo-realism is thought of as a contemporary kind of realism, emphasizing the
domestic political landscape and its determining factors in terms of power dynamics and foreign
policy development. Neorealist believes that governments can use their unique capabilities to
transform distinct aspects of national power into state power. Balance of Power theory proposes
that both of these countries are locked in a perpetual cycle of war and attempt to maximize each
other's actions through balancing, offers another rationale for the conflict and the role of India-
Pakistan. Using the theory, it is possible to discuss several instances of LOC infringements,
border assassinations of military personnel, and the installation of the most modern and efficient
weaponry by both sides. One of the key aspects of realism is the balance of power. This
occurrence suggests that the global framework is chaotic and that every country must strengthen
its military capabilities if it is to remain afloat. This power balance is thought to boost the
country's capability while reducing potential threats. John Rawls claimed that justice is the
fundamental attribute of social systems. The core nature of society, or more specifically, how the
main institutions of society allocate basic liberties and responsibilities and decide the distribution
of benefits from mutual cooperation, is the "primary subject" of justice. Finding the core values
for judging society's fundamental structures is the main challenge for any model of justice.
Rawls seeks to address the inequality issue by imagining that the rules of justice were established
by people in an "original position" of absolute equality where a "veil of ignorance" prevents
people from maximizing personal future positions by bending the conditions of the agreement to
their own benefit. In the original place, what social organizing values would people pick? Two
essential components of justice, according to Rawls, would be integrated into the social
agreement. The universal tenets of maximal freedom and equivalent/fair opportunities are as
follows:

1. Every person is entitled to the greatest overall system of fundamental liberties that is
consistent with a similar system of freedom/liberty for everyone.

2. Financial and social equality must be set up so that it is:

A. To the maximum extent possible beneficial for the least privileged, in line with the just-
savings concept, and

B. Connected to the posts and offices available to everyone under reasonable equality in
opportunity.

In terms of lexical superiority, Rawls believes that the 1st rule of maximal liberty is preferable to
the 2nd and that within the 2nd rule, premise 2b, the equal chance rule, is preferable to rule 2a,
the difference rule. According to him, the acceptance of these principles by people in their
original position follows logically from their discussions aimed at creating a society that is
committed to shared prosperity.

Literature Review:

Muhammad Ahmad, in his paper, “Struggle for Legitimacy and Escalating Human Rights
Violations in Indian-held Kashmir: A Study of Modi Years,” is of the view that the special status
of Indian Occupied Kashmir has been abolished by the BJP government in 2019, causing a
significant rift in bilateral relations between India and Pakistan. Kashmiris have been denied
basic human rights since independence, including the right to choose and life. The Indian
government has pursued policies to suppress their voices and commit human rights violations.
The research investigates the human rights abuses in Kashmir, analyzing the issue from realism,
constructivism, and balance of power theory. India has used excessive military might and tactics
to stabilize its rule, violating international conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. The United Nations must intervene to stop the ill treatment of Kashmiris, who have been
victims of Indian defiance for decades.

Agnieszka Kuszewska in her in-depth work titled, “The India-Pakistan Conflict in Kashmir and
Human Rights in the Context of POST-2019 Political Dynamics,” mentions that the special
status of Indian Occupied Kashmir has been abolished by the BJP government in 2019, leading
to a deteriorating bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan. Kashmiris have been denied
basic human rights since independence, including the right to choose and the right to life. India
has pursued policies to suppress Kashmiris' right to self-determination, leading to grave human
rights abuses. The study analyzes the issue from realism, constructivism, and balance of power
theory, revealing that India has been using excessive military might and tactics to stabilize and
legitimize its rule. The United Nations must intervene to stop the ill treatment of Kashmiri
people, who have been victims of Indian defiance for decades. The Sunni Muslim-dominated
Kashmir Valley has witnessed an anti-India insurgency since 1989, supported by Pakistan-
sponsored proxies. The presence of Indian armed forces and ongoing military repression
profoundly affect the civilian population, exposing them to institutionalized violence, repression,
and dispossession. The complex situation in the Valley stems from the historically inherited
strategic significance of the region, embedded in the protracted and escalating dispute between
India and Pakistan. Following Kashmir's bifurcation, a lockdown was imposed, resulting in the
longest-ever internet shutdown in a democratic country.
Ayesha Tanzeem, in her research article, “One Year Later, Human Rights Violations Continue
in Indian Kashmir,” is of the view that Kashmir, a territory under Indian control, has been in
dispute since its independence from the British in 1947. Human Rights Watch reports that
hundreds of people remain detained without charge, critics are threatened with arrest, and access
to the internet is limited. Local authorities enacted a curfew on Tuesday and Wednesday in
anticipation of protests marking the one-year anniversary of a change in the Indian constitution
that revoked article 370, which granted the Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir state special
status. Pakistan declared India's actions illegal and in violation of bi-lateral agreements and
United Nations resolutions. India rejected the criticism, stating the action was an internal matter
designed to integrate the region and usher in economic development.

Human Rights Watch, in its annual report for the year 2021, “Behind the Kashmir Conflict:
Abuses by Indian Security Forces and Militant Groups Continue,” highlights that Kashmir has
been a hotbed of repression by Indian forces and counter militants, with targeted executions and
detentions leaving residents fearful of speaking to international human rights organizations.
Human Rights Watch documented nine custodial killings in 1998 and one in 1997, with the
government justifying them as a way to counter a serious "terrorist" threat. The Kashmir Monitor
has documented 300 cases of disappearances since 1990, but an association of the parents of
missing sons has been unable to persuade the government to provide information about their
missing sons. Indian security forces also engage in brutal forms of torture, which have the
sanction of senior officials. The State Human Rights Commission, mandated to investigate
complaints of human rights violations and make non-binding recommendations to the
government, began its work in early 1998 and has undertaken investigations in some 200 cases.
However, it does not take up cases pending before the High Court and cannot directly investigate
abuses carried out by the army or other federal forces. Prosecutions of security personnel
responsible for abuses are rare, and the commission does not take up cases pending before the
High Court. The report is based on a mission to Indian-controlled Kashmir in October 1998,
where Human Rights Watch conducted interviews with doctors, lawyers, journalists, human
rights activists, and other residents of Kashmir.
Research Methodology:
Chapter Two:

Modi’s Era: An Understanding of the Human Rights Situation in the Indian

Occupied Kashmir

In 2019, the BJP government revoked Article 370 of the Constitution which abolished the special
status of Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK). In 2020, the Indian government passed a domicile law
that led to significant changes in the demographics of Kashmir. These legislations have a blatant
disregard for the Indian Constitution and the rights of Kashmiris, who will become the minority
in their land. These developments have further deteriorated relations between India and Pakistan.
Pakistan gave a “new political map” under which IOk is shown as part of Pakistan territory. Both
countries achieved independence seventy-five years ago from British colonialism, but could not
coexist peacefully since then. The bilateral relationship between both countries is marred by the
Kashmir issue. Since independence, Kashmiris have been denied basic human rights including
the right to choose and the right to life. India has pursued hard-lined policies to suppress the right
to self-determination of the Kashmiri people. The right to self-determination is regarded as a
fundamental right in the United Nations Charter. This right is also protected by the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UNSC has passed several resolutions on
the Kashmir issue, none of which could be implemented due to India’s false promises and
obstinate approach. India has been suppressing the freedom struggle in Kashmir using various
methods. It has committed killings, brutalities, rapes, and forced detention under the veil of
draconian Acts and Laws. IOK is one of the world’s highly militarized zones. India has always
refused to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Kashmir issue due to which peace between both
countries has become a far-off reality. In this paper, the researcher enquires about India’s
illegitimate occupation of Kashmir and gross human rights violations in recent years.

India’s Kashmir Strategy during the Modi’s Period:

India has pursued belligerent policies and sheer abuse of human rights in Kashmir. Modi-led BJP
rule has been catastrophic for the basic human rights of Kashmiris. In the following section,
Modi’s Kashmir strategy has been discussed briefly. Article 370 was a part of the Indian
Constitution which gave Jammu and Kashmir a special status and allowed it to have autonomy in
matters of defense and foreign affairs. This autonomy gradually eroded over time. After coming
to power, Modi revoked Article 370 on 5 August 2019. After this, the state of Jammu and
Kashmir was split into two unions (Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh) which will be ruled by the
federal government. Abrogation of Article 370 also repealed Article 35A, under which
permanent residents of the valley were given special privileges like the right to own property and
have government jobs. It was meant to protect the Muslim majority demographics of the region.
BJP viewed this as discrimination against non-Muslims and a hurdle in development. On several
instances, Prime Minister Modi has openly confessed that Indian forces are instructed to
forcefully respond to dissident Kashmiris. International Human Rights Watch stated that since
2016, Indian forces are brutally killing, blinding, raping, and injuring innocent Kashmiri
civilians. The BJP government uses the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) to tackle protests
and dissidence in the valley. The power and authority of Indian forces have been augmented
through the various Acts. Under Public Safety Act anyone could be kept in police custody for 7
days before presenting the individual before court. Police could even re-arrest the person if the
court orders the release. These draconian laws are used to detain innocent Kashmiris. Armed
Forces Special Power Act allows Indian forces to arrest anyone after presenting an arrest
warrant, shoot anyone based on suspicion, and demolish property without prior notice. Actions
under this act could not be challenged in any court. Under Disturbed Area Act any police officer
or magistrate can use a maximum amount of force (which may cause death) to restore public
order. Before the partition, both Kashmiri Pundits and the Muslims coexisted peacefully in the
valley. After partition, when the Indian government occupied the valley they started moving
Pundits from Kashmir valley to Muslim majority area of Jammu. The purpose of this move was
to influence the demographics of the region. The Indian government has been using Kashmiri
Pundits as a tool to delay the plebiscite. After the revocation of Article 370, the Modi
government is actively pursuing re-settlement of Pundits in Kashmir; this will increase the Hindu
population with Kashmiri domicile. This will also help BJP to win state elections in occupied
Kashmir. Re annexation of occupied Kashmir and its division into union territories clearly shows
India’s intention of continuing its illegal rule. India has been brazenly flouting its international
commitments and disregarding the sentiments and rights of Kashmiris. Like Israel, India has
been violating international law. Former Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres advised Indian
counterpart to “not be afraid or hesitate to populate Kashmir with people from all over India.
Only a demographic change in Kashmir can help India to claim it” The Indian government is
establishing “Sainik colonies” in Kashmir for retired Indian soldiers. This will increase the
Hindu majority and turn Kashmiris into a minority. India is making biased laws and policies to
destroy the identity of Kashmiris. It is taking away the idea of Kashmiriat by making domicile
laws, and settling Kashmiri Pundits and Indian soldiers. Kashmiriat is the notion of Kashmiri
identity which has persisted for centuries even when the region was governed by Sikh Maharajas
and Dogra rulers. Though India claims to be a secular state, it has converted the Kashmir issue
into a sectarian and religious issue. Thus, peace in Kashmir remains elusive.

Gross human rights violations in Indian-Occupied Kashmir during the Modi’s

Regime:
Kashmir Valley, which is known for its beauty, is among the most militarized regions in the
world. The Kashmir independence movement intensified in 1989, after which more than eight
lac Indian troops were deployed in the valley. Ironically, innocent Kashmiri civilians are treated
as enemies by the Indian forces. Indian operations are termed as “classic dirty war”, and human
rights organizations have noted massive violations of human rights including the destruction of
properties, terrorizing civilians, extrajudicial killings, using civilians as human shields and for
forced labor, rapes, forced disappearance and creation of military camps and torture cells in the
valley. Violence in Kashmir hasn’t been discontinued yet and has been sighted since August
2019. The arrestees of the night raids have also frequently mentioned the torture they suffer
during confinement. Young people were more often the target of torture. Besides physical
assault, victims also faced sexual assault. These acts are blunt violations of international
instruments like ICCPR and UNHR which strongly condemn the torture, degradation, and
inhumane treatment of detainees. The fierce reaction of Indian forces towards Kashmiri’s call for
freedom and self-determination is a moment of truth for both Indian authorities and international
human rights organizations. In June 2018 of UN Commission on Human Rights indicated that
this barbarity hasn’t been gone unnoticed. It mentioned that July 2016’s invoking of the right of
self-determination by the Kashmiris set in motion excessive military force by India which led to
an awful number of killings and injuries to innocent individuals. Article 7 of the ICCPR does not
allow such actions. An approximate of 150 civilians had died in this civil war from July 2016 to
March 2018. The weapons used in the encounters were also not lawful according to the
covenants. Metal bullets were fired by a 12-gauge shotgun. Invasion of privacy was done by the
security forces during Cordon and Search Operations as well by conducting raids in private
houses and businesses in Kashmir. During these operations, the security forces surrounded the
area and searched each home for weapons or signs of insurgency. Media personnel and human
rights organizations have kept a check on these raids and pointed out the human rights violations
but the repealing of Article 370 has made this monitoring difficult. After August 2019 only six of
these operations were reported in live stream media which is far from the truth as hundreds of
these operations have been conducted ever since. The residents of district Baramulla have
testified to 400 operations since the crackdown. Apart from searching the place thoroughly,
civilians were also beaten, electrocuted, and forced to eat dirt. They were also threatened with
more torture and killing of the animals that were their source of income. Civilians were subject
to arbitrary arrest and illegal confinement and women were harassed. After Article 370 was
repealed access to education was also blocked by shutting down educational institutions and a
state of lockdown was imposed. These are violations of basic human rights stated in clauses of
UDHR. The autonomy of the state and statehood has been destroyed since then and a constant
state of chaos and lawlessness has been imposed on the people of Kashmir. These circumstances
have further increased the tensions in the Subcontinent. Every other day civilian and military
encounter has been reported and several human rights are violated. Since August 2019, a curfew
has been imposed in the state, illegal arrest and detention of civilians and political leaders have
become frequent, and access to the outer world has been restricted by cutting down internet and
phone services. This freedom of speech hasn’t been restored since then.

The UNHRC called this blockade a “form of collective punishment”. As a result of the
lockdown, human rights organizations have been facing numerous challenges and hurdles while
investigating and reporting allegations of human rights violations. Moreover, it has also been
challenging to help people who are facing these brutal actions of the Indian government. It is
mainly due to the lax judicial system, blockade of communication, and restriction on freedom of
movement. Though, freedom of expression and press freedom have always been assaulted in
IOK, after the abrogation of Article 370 freedom of expression and opinion has been severely
violated. The suspension of the internet and limitation on movement has cut Kashmiri
newspapers and journalists from the rest of the world. Journalists are unable to openly expose
human rights abuses in the media because there has been a dramatic decrease in reports of human
rights violations. In 2016, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution under
which an internet blockade was considered a violation of human rights, and India had signed it.
The resolution included the clause in which “it condemns unequivocally measures to
intentionally prevent or disrupt access to or dissemination of information online”. Restriction on
phone services and the internet as opposed to internationally accepted fundamental human rights
like the right to peaceful assembly, right to freedom of speech, and right to access information.
In addition to this, after August 5 strict curfew was imposed in the valley. People were not
allowed to go to work, visit doctors, or attend schools. The Supreme Court of India also ordered
a ban on public gatherings under Section 44 of the Code of Criminal Procedures. Still, the region
is strictly controlled and activities of political parties are restricted. The abrogation of Article 370
had grave implications for judicial processes. There has been a delay in court proceedings, legal
assistance is missing and people are not presented before courts. These facts demonstrate India’s
failure to abide by the international human rights declaration. Besides these violations India also
illegally detained political leaders including Farooq Abdullah, Omar Abdulla, and Mehbooba
Mufti. Moreover, more than 4100 people including political representatives, elected leaders,
lawyers, activists, businessmen, and students were detained after 5 August 2019 under Jammu
and Kashmir Public Safety Act. Under this act, the government could detain anyone without
charge or trial for two years. This is a violation of Article 9 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR). Ironically, International organizations and actors remain silent as always.

International actors are reluctant to pay attention to the sufferings of Kashmiris, which led to
grave repercussions for fundamental human rights in the region. After the abolishment of the
special status of Jammu and Kashmir suffering of the Kashmiri people has increased more than
ever. They are restricted to their homes and their political, economic, and social rights are being
crushed viciously. BJP-led Indian government is bent on proving its legitimacy in Indian
Occupied Kashmir. They are taking desperate steps like changing the demographics of the region
to stabilize their authority. It is the time when the international community should take notice of
Indian belligerence and abuse of the internationally accepted Convention of 1990, the Covenant
of 1966, and the Declaration of 1948. The United Nations must intervene to stop the ill-treatment
of Kashmiri people, who have been victims of Indian defiance for decades. The human rights
crisis in IOK should be minimized by taking steps like the release of political leader activists and
civilians, lifting of curfew, and ending restrictions on communication. History is a testament that
human rights violations, indefinite curfews, and crackdowns have done no good. It has only
aggravated Kashmiris to take arms and revolt against the Indian regime.
Chapter Three:

Introduction:
The Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed conflict between Indian security forces
and insurgents demanding independence or accession to Pakistan. Following the crackdown
against militants in 1989, there have been increased reports of sexual violence at the hands of the
Indian army, police, and paramilitary forces. Rape is used as a means of targeting women who
the security forces accuse of being militant sympathisers. More specifically, the rape of women
in Kashmir by Indian security forces is an attempt to punish and humiliate the community.

In this article, I will focus on the role of Indian security forces in using counter-terrorism
measures as an excuse to commit acts of sexual violence against Kashmiri women and highlight
the system of impunity that protects them from accountability. I will consider policies under
International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) that
prohibit such acts of violence and offer protection to survivors. Lastly, I will discuss the potential
policies that could be adopted by the international community to enforce strict action against
sexual violence in Kashmir and demand India’s compliance with international law.
How are counter-terrorism operations leading to increased instances of sexual
violence?
In 2019, a Human Rights Watch report on Jammu and Kashmir highlighted cases of sexual
misconduct by Indian Police, military, and intelligence agencies occurring primarily as a result
of “counter-insurgency operations”. According to the report, rape most often occurs during
crackdowns and search operations during which men are taken out for identification while
security forces search their homes. Women also fall victim to sexual violence during attacks on
civilians following militant ambushes. The women who are raped are accused of providing
militants with food and shelter. In other cases, the officers do not state any reason for their attack
on women, and rape occurs simply because women are present in areas where cordon-and-search
operations occur. Human Rights Watch states that security forces use rape during counter-
insurgency operations as a weapon to punish, intimidate, and humiliate communities. On the
other hand, counter-terrorist operations also provoke sexual violence against Kashmiri women
when insurgent groups retaliate. Women are raped by militant forces as a way of punishing
families that are believed to be informers to Indian security forces or suspected of opposing the
militants in any capacity. The abduction and subsequent rape of women after their family
members are murdered by militant groups is also a common occurrence.

In both cases, survivors are reluctant to report their stories because of intimidation and a threat of
retribution from both security forces and insurgent groups. In instances where cases of sexual
violence by the security forces are reported, the survivors are either forced to take their case back
or the police fail to produce useful results.

System of Impunity:
Section 5 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) states that “No prosecution, suit
or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central
Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise
of the powers conferred by this Act”. Under this section, Army officials are offered a form of
immunity where military personnel cannot be prosecuted unless there is a prior sanction for
investigation by the central government. Unfortunately, the Indian government rarely
investigates cases of rape by security forces in Kashmir. It is reported by “Kashmir Media
Service” that security forces raped 11,224 women between 1989 and 2020, including those as
young as 11 years and as old as 60-year women. When cases are investigated and accused
officers are found guilty, punishments are negligible in that the maximum punishment handed
out is suspension, while the details of the case are never made public. Furthermore, The Public
Safety Act (PSA) of 1978 enables authorities to detain Kashmiris for two years without trial. It
gives security forces total discretion in detentions, which could occur simply for trying to resist
sexual violence or attempting to report such incidents. A person who is detained under the PSA
does not have the right to move a bail application before a criminal court, and cannot access any
lawyer to represent him or her before the detaining authority. In this manner, PSA ensures that
victims of sexual violence do not have access to justice. Thus, a system of impunity arises where
security forces escape accountability as a result of the Indian government’s failure to effectively
prosecute and punish their criminal acts.