Book on Election Monitoring 2004

PREFACE

 This report is both shorter than intended and took longer than expected to complete. It ought to have come out several months ago. But coping with the death of Aasia Jeelani and looking after the three who suffered injuries distracted attention from finalisation of the report. We were also compelled by circumstances to reduce the number of teams from eight to just three. While this makes for less comprehensive monitoring of the elections, nevertheless,  it is our conviction that our findings have some relevance. For one because election process provides greater mobility and easier access to people and places than available otherwise. And for another it demonstrates how the fundamental issue of people’s aspirations remains un-addressed. This impasse influences political developments in Indian held Jammu & Kashmir in so far as it foregrounds the political reality of non-resolution of a long festering dispute. Furthermore, it is evidence of how a formal procedure of election intrinsic to democracy cannot be imposed on a real and existing un-democratic structure.

We are mindful of the need to be rigorous in collection of information and its analysis. This report is based on phase-wise reports, and discussion with the team members supplemented by relevant official records. We, nevertheless, welcome criticism and invite response from readers so that mistakes, factual or analytical, if any, are corrected.

 INTRODUCTION

There is more to elections in Jammu and Kashmir than the issue of voter turnout. * First and foremost the issue is whether “free and fair” elections are at all possible in the conditions that operate here. The first condition for “free” people is their right to live in dignity and freedom, something that is denied to Kashmiris. While ceasefire operates in the border between Indian and Pakistani armies there has been no cessation of hostilities by the Indian security forces inside Jammu & Kashmir.

Counter-insurgency revolves around cutting the links between the people and the militants by proceeding on the assumption that everyone is a suspect unless proved otherwise. The point is to understand that atrocities are built into Counter Insurgency because people are made to pay such a heavy price that others get deterred.

More than five hundred thousand Indian security forces remain in Kashmir ostensibly to fight the so-called “cross border terrorism”. In a sweep the resistance in Kashmir is equated with terrorism, terrorism exported by Pakistan. More than 500,000 troops are deployed here operating under the ‘Carte Blanche’ offered by the Armed Forces (Special) Powers Act with arbitrary exercise of powers to detain a person for upto two years under the Public Safety Act (PSA) without having to file charge sheet. Combine impunity with powers to search, question, raid houses, detain and kill, all on mere suspicion. Most public spaces are closed for any kind of dissident meeting. Section 144 has been in operation virtually un-interrupted for the past fifteen years. And no less than five lakh people living within ten kms along the 740 kms long Line of Control (LoC) have been living under 5pm to 9am curfew. Campaigns by those calling for boycott seldom passed being disrupted by the security forces, often by arresting preventing political leaders from addressing the public. It is undoubtedly true that a section of the militants chose to target civilians who wished to cast their votes. That their acts can cause incalculable harm, wittingly or unwittingly, was brought home to us when our colleague and friend Aasia Jeelani died in an IED suspected to be planted by militants. We have long spoken out against the use of landmines and IED’s that have the dubious distinction making no difference between friend and foe and for being responsible for large number of civilian casualties. That on day such as the election the militants still felt it necessary to interfere with what is people’s right to decide whether they want or do not want to exercise their franchise is a sorry comment on their commitment to respecting the will of the people. This is all the more tragic because the demand for right of self-determination is an explicit recognition of people’s right to decide un-encumbered one way or another.

But it would be a travesty to regard “free and fair” elections as a panacea for a people alienated and brutalized let alone to believe that the security force which is responsible for most of the atrocities in the past fifteen years can provide a ‘secure’ environment for the people. That the security forces inspire fear and not confidence goes to very crux of the problem. If for sake of argument all this is dismissed then what cannot be denied is that the process itself was fatally flawed.

Absence of intensive revision of electoral rolls since 1989 meant that an anomalous situation noticed in the 2002 Assembly elections was re-inforced: whereas 2001 census reported that the valley’s population was 5.43 million and that of Jammu 4.63 million, an approximate difference of 20% as per the electoral rolls prepared by the Election Commission the number of electors in Jammu was 3.2 million compared to valley’s 2.9 million! As a matter of fact the electoral rolls were last revised in 1987 unlike elsewhere where intensive revisions took place in 1995, 2001 and 2004.  In Jammu & Kashmir instead only summary revision took place. What this meant becomes evident from a story that appeared in September 5, 2002 issue of Indian Express. According to them in 1987 Sopore and Jammu (west) had roughly same number of electors i.e. 54,000. By 2002 whereas voters roll shows that in Sopore the number of voters grew by 19% in 19 years that of Jammu (west) grew by an 177%! Which is to say that were intensive revision undertaken the growth in the number of electors would not be radically different between Jammu and Kashmir regions. Therefore, Jammu region showing higher number of electors than Kashmir both in 2002 as well as now means that the irregularity noticed in 2002 Assembly polls persists. It means that atleast 10%, if not more, of Kashmiri electors do not find any mention in the electoral rolls. To put it another way the Election Commission maybe responsible for denying a large number of adults in Kashmir region their voting right. This too must be regarded as a form of coercion. This discrepancy in its turn distorts the actual voter turnout.

 

Table 1: District Wise Electors (M/F As per summary revision upto January 1, 2004)

 

Constituency (District)	Males	Females	Total
Varmul (Kupwara & Baramulla)	5,23,161	4,17,837	9,40,998
Srinagar (Srinagar & Budgam)	6,05,469	4,48,264	10,53,733
Anantnag (Ananatnag and Pulwama)	5,68,139	4,30,766	9,98,905
Ladakh	90,441	92,23	1,82,677
Udhampur (Udhampur and Doda)	7,16,841	6,31,880	13,48,721
Jammu (Jammu, Poonch and Rajouri)	9,68,085	8,83,753	18,51,838
	34,72,136	29,04,736	63,76,872

                                     

Total number of Polling stations: 7218

 

Table 2: Region Wise Electors

 

Region