Yasin Malik, a prominent figure in the Kashmiri liberation movement and leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), has been unlawfully detained by Indian authorities in a New Delhi prison for several years. Alongside other Hurriyat leaders, he has been held in custody without proper legal recourse. Yasin Malik fervently advocated for an independent Kashmir, a cause aligned with the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). His imprisonment reflects the injustice faced by those striving for self-determination, highlighting the complexities of the Kashmir conflict under the Indian administration. Malik’s struggle underscores the ongoing debate surrounding political dissent and human rights in the region.
Malik has faced numerous legal battles, with three primary charges dominating the proceedings: alleged involvement in terror financing, the 1990 killing of four Indian Air Force personnel, and the kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed, sister of Mehbooba Mufti. These charges have been pursued by the notorious investigation agency of India, National Investigation Agency (NIA) with the intent of seeking punishment against him. It’s worth noting that during the initial five years of the BJP/RSS government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, no cases related to militancy were filed against Yasin Malik and his party. In 1994, JKLF declared a unilateral ceasefire following assurances of a political resolution and the suspension of militancy-related cases against Yasin Malik and his party. However, the Indian government and court breached the agreement by convicting him in previously closed cases. Sadly, the recent developments in Yasin Malik’s case reveal India’s insidious intent to undermine the historical and unique political and cultural identity of the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). The prosecution of Kashmiri freedom fighters in such cases underscores India’s malicious campaign to strip Kashmiris of their genuine leadership.
On 19 May 2022, Malik was convicted by the Indian National Investigation Agency (NIA) Court on charges of conspiracy and waging war against the Indian state. During the trial, Malik protested the charges and said he was a freedom fighter. “Terrorism-related charges levelled against me are concocted, fabricated and politically motivated,”. “If seeking Azadi (freedom) is a crime, then I am ready to accept this crime and its consequences,” he told the judge. On May 24, 2022, a trial court awarded life imprisonment to Malik after holding him guilty of various offences under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code. Though, the statement pleading to the charge of guilty is only because of coercion of Indian establishment and judicial system. Therefore, NIA demanded a death penalty for Yasin Malik and Delhi High Court listed hearing on May 2023. It is pertinent to mention here; the Yasin Malik’s case is being hastily pursued is leading to apprehension of history of politically motivated judicial murders of Kashmiri leadership is being repeated.
Subsequently, the Indian government’s strategic maneuvering in the internationally recognized disputed region of IIOJK commenced with a meticulously orchestrated series of events. It all commenced with the dismissal of Mehbooba Mufti’s administration in 2018 and the imposition of governor’s rule, under the pretext of fabricated corruption charges and deteriorating law and order. On August 5, 2019, India unlawfully revoked Articles 370 and 35A, subjecting the disputed region to the Indian constitution. This was followed by the enactment of illegitimate laws, including provisions for J&K domicile, aimed at altering Kashmir’s demographic balance in favor of the Hindu minority. Since August 2019, the political leadership of IIOJK has been incarcerated in Indian and J&K prisons, facing decade-old charges, as a means to stifle the masses’ right to political resistance against Indian machinations.
Legally, the NIA’s demand of death sentence of Yasin Malik is unjustified as according to the jail conduct report, he has maintained satisfactory behavior. Since his arrest, there have been no allegations of engaging in the activities for which he was convicted, and there are no other pending criminal cases against him. He is also not a habitual offender; with only two cases against him, the demand for a death sentence is highly unjustified as his case does not meet the criteria for rare cases. He renounced violence in 1994, five Indian Prime Minister met him that is indication that he wants peaceful resolution and there is no evidence of conspiracy against him, Therefore, it is contended that the convict should receive a minimum sentence and there is no justification for imposing the death penalty.
Therefore, the case of Hurriyat leader is particularly alarming as India perceives him as an obstacle to its nefarious schemes. Discriminatory practices in the Indian judicial system against Kashmiri Muslims have been evident from the judicial execution of Maqbool Butt to the cases of Afzal Guru, Bilkis Bano, and the Babri Masjid demolition etc. Yasin Malik has already been unjustly sentenced to life imprisonment in a fabricated case, yet the Indian regime persists in seeking the death penalty for him for political gain. The Indian court has convicted Yasin Malik in a baseless, concocted case dating back 30 years. The international media has labeled India’s illegal actions as political vendetta. The onslaught of cases against the Kashmiri leader has instilled fear in many in the disputed region, signaling the Indian state’s intent to silence dissent.
The saffronisation of Indian judicial system being used to perpetrate HRAs in IIOJK. Yasin Malik’s judicial murder unmask the Indian claims of being champion of democratic value that is widely criticized by regional and international level. Tufail Raja, the legal representative for Malik in the NIA’s fabricated case, has asserted that false charges are being concocted against him. Criticizing the Indian government and justice system for their failure to safeguard minority rights, PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti has expressed dismay. Khurram Parvez, a prominent human rights advocate, emphasized the universal right to a fair trial, stating that the resurgence of old cases without adequate representation raises significant concerns. Human rights groups in IIOJK have voiced their concerns over the Indian government’s unjust treatment of Yasin Malik. Faizaan Butt, an independent researcher based in IIOJK, highlighted the systemic disregard for legal procedures when it comes to Kashmiri political detainees, pointing out both the Indian state and judiciary’s neglect of established rules. Amnesty International, a global human rights organization, has acknowledged receiving an appeal for the release of Yasin Malik, a distinguished Kashmiri politician and Chairman of Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), who remains unjustly detained in an Indian prison. Urging immediate intervention and advocacy for his release to facilitate meaningful dialogue and establish lasting peace in the internationally recognized disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir, Amnesty International has been called upon to act swiftly in response to the appeal.
In nutshell, Yasin Malik is being punished for leading a peaceful human rights movement in a region which thrives on Indian state’s violence & authoritarianism. In IIOJK, the pro-freedom leaders and organizations have cautioned that Hindutva inspired BJP regime is conspiring in 2024 Indian elections. The global community must pay attention to the Indian government’s maltreatment of political detainees in IIOJK. The sentencing of notable Kashmiri figure Yasin Malik on fabricated terrorism accusations serves as a fruitless attempt to stifle dissent against India’s flagrant human rights violations. The Modi administration must face repercussions. Despite efforts to deceive, India cannot quash the rightful Kashmiri struggle against foreign occupation. India remains the primary obstacle to peace in South Asia and must cease its state-sponsored terrorism while adhering to UNSC resolutions concerning Kashmir.