India, in order to permanently sustain its illegal occupation of IIOJK, is pursuing a strategy of legal siege. It is intensifying its control over the UN-recognized disputed territory of IIOJK. This began with the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A, stripping the region of its special constitutional status. Since then, over 800 Indian laws have been imposed. Now, the recent J&K Reorganization Amendment Bill is set to further strengthen India’s grip on the occupied territory.
This bill is expected to have severe repercussions for the disputed territory and its already suffering, innocent Kashmiri population. The J&K Reorganization Bill exposes the fragility of Indian democracy and constitutes a direct assault on the already shrinking space for freedom and dissent in the region.
After the amendment, the Lieutenant Governor will have the authority to directly remove ministers from their posts. Under the provisions of the bill, the Chief Minister or any minister can be dismissed from office if they are detained for 30 days or more in a case carrying a minimum punishment of five years. The ruling Hindutva government gains a dangerous tool to weaponize detentions and suppress political dissent.
Omar Abdullah, already seen as a puppet Chief Minister, was even manhandled by the Hindutva police while attempting to visit the graveyard on July 13—a historic day for the Muslims of the territory to commemorate Martyrs’ Day. Going forward, he and others will have even less control, while the Lieutenant Governor, Manoj Sinha, will be further empowered. Nevertheless, this bill is clearly aimed at dismantling what little remaining authority they may still possess.
This builds on the already existing authoritarian approach in the region. Innocent Kashmiris continue to face detention without fair trial under draconian laws such as the Public Safety Act (PSA), Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). Now, the J&K reorganization (amendment) bill represents another crackdown on administrative, and representative structure.
Moreover, this pattern of centralized control is not unprecedented in the occupied territory, as the Indian state has a documented history of employing systemic repression to stifle political dissent. The majority of Kashmiri political leaders remain incarcerated, and the current Modi administration seeks to intensify this suppression by converting Yasin Malik’s life sentence to capital punishment based on spurious and politically motivated allegations. The terrorism-related charges against Malik are demonstrably fabricated and lack substantive evidence. If the pursuit of freedom and the exercise of the inherent right to self-determination are criminalized, then, by this flawed rationale, his unlawful detention and life imprisonment should be escalated to the death penalty—underscoring the egregious miscarriage of justice inherent in these proceedings.
This will have even graver consequences for the people of the territory. Stripped of political representation and denied any meaningful platform, the masses will be condemned to endure their suffering in silence—abandoned, voiceless, and unheard. With the entire political leadership silenced through illegal detentions and human rights defenders locked away, Kashmir has become a prison without walls—where even the innocent is caged, and justice is nothing more than a distant echo.
This initiative by the Hindutva regime closely mirrors the Israeli model. Israel has implemented a complex and widely criticized legal framework to maintain control over Palestinians in the occupied territories, considered by many to be draconian, discriminatory, and indicative of an apartheid or occupation system. For instance, Administrative Detention allows Israel to detain Palestinians without charge or trial for renewable six-month periods. As of 2025, hundreds of Palestinians — including minors — are held under such conditions.
In conclusion, this initiative by the Hindutva regime appears designed to further its agenda of brutality against innocents — to instill fear, implement demographic changes, and increase centralized control. With the recent surge in the indigenous freedom movement in occupied Kashmir, this measure seems aimed at suppressing dissent and terrorizing the Muslim population. Moreover, it exposes the falsity of India’s so-called “normalcy” narrative. India’s pattern of false flag operations and its recent military setbacks in conflicts with Pakistan further reflect its weakened position. As a result, the Kashmir conflict is gaining more international attention. In short, this hostile amendment is a deliberate attempt by India to portray Kashmir as an internal matter, while in reality, it reinforces its illegitimate occupation.
