Azad Jammu and Kashmir has once again been thrust into turmoil following the proscription of the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) by the regional administration. The situation escalated dramatically after a trader affiliated with the JAAC was reportedly shot during an altercation with law‑enforcement personnel. The incident sparked widespread anger, and the following day clashes erupted outside a Rawalakot hospital where the victim’s body had been brought. Tragically, the confrontation resulted in the deaths of at least four policemen and seven protesters, deepening the crisis and inflaming public sentiment.

This sequence of events mirrors earlier confrontations between the AJK government and the JAAC, where demands for reform have alternated with violent clashes. The region is particularly tense as the JAAC has called for a major strike, and with the group now banned, emotions are running high. At the heart of the dispute lies the JAAC’s demand for the abolition of refugee seats reserved for those who migrated from Indian‑occupied Kashmir and settled in AJK. The government’s decision to ban the organisation has only heightened tensions, while the deaths of both protesters and policemen underscore the urgent need for restraint and dialogue.

The killing of civilians and law‑enforcement officers requires thorough investigation, but banning a popular movement is not a solution. History has shown that proscribing organisations with grassroots support rarely succeeds in silencing dissent. Instead, such measures often exacerbate divisions and fuel further unrest. The JAAC, for its part, must also reconsider its approach. While its earlier demands focused on civic and governance reforms, its current push for constitutional changes — particularly the abolition of refugee seats — is a matter that requires careful deliberation within the legislature, not agitation on the streets.

The AJK Supreme Court has already clarified in its opinion on a reference regarding refugee seats that constitutional changes can only be enacted “by an assembly possessed of the full democratic mandate of the people, after deliberation” and cannot be forced upon a government under duress. This guidance must be respected. Constitutional reform is a delicate matter that demands consensus, debate, and democratic procedure.

Both sides must now step back from confrontation. The authorities should reconsider the ban on the JAAC, recognising that suppressing dissent will not resolve grievances. At the same time, JAAC supporters must ensure that their protests remain peaceful and channel their demands through the proper legislative forum. Azad Jammu and Kashmir is a region of immense sensitivity, and disturbances here carry consequences that extend beyond its borders.

The path forward lies in dialogue, restraint, and respect for democratic processes. Only by meeting halfway and engaging in rational debate can the government and the JAAC prevent further escalation and work towards reforms that strengthen governance without undermining stability. The people of AJK deserve solutions that uphold peace, justice, and constitutional integrity.

Also Read: JAAC ban tensions