The politically volatile region of Pakistan-administered Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK) has once again plunged into a crisis of civil unrest. In late September, a local protest over subsidies for wheat and electricity transformed into a broader political movement demanding comprehensive reform and regional ecomic relief. The demonstrations have pressured the government into negotiations and legal concessions, after initial harsh repression only further fueled public dissent.

In recent weeks, protests led by the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC) turned violent, rocking cities across AJK, from capital Muzaffarabad to districts of Kotli, Rawalakot, and Mirpur. News outlets have reported at least nine people were killed, including police officers and civilians, with more than 200 injured in clashes between protesters and law enforcement. These demonstrations have paralyzed daily life and raise serious concerns about the governance, and the rule of law in the disputed territory.

The unrest was sparked by a 38-point charter of demands issued by the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC), a coalition of traders, civil society members, student groups, and political activists. Among their key demands were the restoration of subsidies on electricity and wheat; a reduction in electricity tariffs, which they say are far higher than in other parts of Pakistan despite the region being a major source of hydropower; improved health and education services; downsizing the oversized ministerial cabinet; removal of legislative seats reserved for Kashmiri refugees, which locals argue distort electoral representation; and accountability for police violence during protests.

The movement accuses the AJK government of corruption, inefficiency and subservience to the federal authorities in Islamabad. Protesters have emphasized the apparent disparity between the region’s wealth of natural resources—particularly water and hydropower—and its ongoing struggles with poverty and perceived government neglect.

While the AJK government initially sought to suppress the protests through excessive police force and mass communication blackouts, it eventually—under pressure from Islamabad—agreed to negotiate with the JKJAAC. The talks were strained, stalling in early October, but were later revived following intervention by the federal government.

Eventually, the parties reached a peace agreement that included a rollback of rising electricity costs, continued subsidies for essential items such as wheat, the creation of a judicial commission to investigate injuries and deaths resulting from the protests, and a commitment to reduce government spending, including cuts to the ministerial cabinet.

While the agreement has led to a temporary de-escalation, many activists remain skeptical about its implementation, fearing that the government’s promises may not translate into real change.

Amidst the turmoil, legal challenges and constitutional debates have emerged regarding the right to protest and the state’s response. In a notable legal development, the High Court of AJK ruled that citizens have a constitutionally protected right to peaceful protest. This was seen as a significant verdict, given the government’s frequent use of Section 144 to restrict assemblies and communications. According to Dawn Newspaper, the court stressed that civil liberties cannot be arbitrarily suspended.

Another major legal issue was the demand to reform or abolish the reserved legislative seats for refugees from Indian-administered Kashmir. These seats are widely viewed as artificially boosting Islamabad’s influence in AJK politics, with critics arguing that they disenfranchise local voters. Modifying this arrangement would require constitutional amendments and is likely to face strong resistance.

The AJK region has also seen an uptick in media censorship and repression of free speech. In early 2025, the AJK government filed criminal cases against journalists under recently amended sections of the penal code for allegedly spreading “fake news.” As reported by the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), these amendments criminalize criticism of government officials and impose penalties of up to seven years’ imprisonment. Legal experts warn that such laws risk undermining AJK’s fragile democratic space and may violate Pakistan’s own constitutional protections as well as international human rights obligations.

The current wave of protests is not an isolated event. AJK has long been plagued by grievances related to economic marginalization, lack of autonomy, and what many perceive as neocolonial governance by Islamabad. Although AJK has its own president, prime minister, and legislative assembly, many key decisions—from budget allocations to foreign affairs—are effectively controlled by Pakistan's federal government and military establishment.

This disconnect has fueled deep frustration across the region, where many residents feel they are treated as second-class citizens. The recent protests have reignited debates over AJK’s ambiguous constitutional status and whether genuine self-governance is possible under the current framework.

The unrest in AJK comes at a time when India-Pakistan relations remain strained over the Kashmir issue. India continues to assert that AJK is an integral part of its territory, while Pakistan accuses India of human rights violations in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The protests in AJK, however, have complicated Islamabad’s narrative of being a responsible caretaker of Kashmiri interests.

International media and observers have taken note that the violent suppression of protests and censorship in AJK have drawn comparisons to Indian-administered Kashmir, potentially weakening Pakistan's moral stance on the Kashmir dispute.

As calm returns to the streets of Muzaffarabad and other cities, the question remains: will this peace last? The implementation of the peace agreement will likely determine the movement's legacy. Protest leaders have warned that if the government fails to follow through, they will resume their agitation, this time with even greater public backing.

From JURIST, Oct. 10. Used with permission.

Note: Spikes in the price of food and fuel since the start of the Ukraine war in 2022 have contributed to popular privation and unrest worldwide.