The court says constitutional changes must follow Article 33 and rejects changes through protests or pressure
An aerial view from a Pakistani military helicopter shows Muzaffarabad, AJK. PHOTO: REUTERS
The Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) High Court on Sunday ruled that the 12 seats reserved for refugees in the legislature are constitutionally protected and cannot be changed through administrative action, political deals or public pressure, according to a detailed advisory opinion issued on a presidential reference.
The 53-member AJK Legislative Assembly includes 12 seats reserved for Kashmiri refugees who migrated from Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir during the 1947 and 1965 conflicts and now reside in Pakistan.
Six seats represent refugees from the Jammu division, estimated at around 434,000 people, while six represent refugees from the Kashmir Valley, whose population is estimated at around 30,000.
The issue of refugee representation has long been a central demand of the now-banned Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), which led to a series of protests last year that turned violent and resulted in several deaths.
In its opinion, the court reaffirmed that the refugee places are guaranteed under Article 22 of the AJK constitution and are rooted in a long legislative history dating back to electoral schemes introduced in 1960 and subsequent constitutional reforms in 1964 and 1970.
The court described the seats as a “constitutional expression of a deep historical and legal truth” stemming from the displacement of Kashmiris after the 1947 partition and the subsequent conflict. It noted that the scheme was further strengthened through successive legal instruments before it was explicitly incorporated into the Constitution through the 13th Amendment.
The court emphasized constitutional supremacy and held that any change in the composition of the Assembly can only be made through the amendment procedure in Article 33.
“The provisions of the Constitution may be amended in accordance with Article 33,” the statement said, adding that the amendment process is “exhaustive and exclusive” and that no authority other than the legislature can legally amend constitutional provisions.
The court said that executive orders, political agreements and public agitation have no legal effect in amending the constitution, stressing that constitutional amendments must be made through “public mandate, parliamentary debate and constitutional procedure”.
A significant part of the statement addressed the use of protests and blockades to press political demands. While affirming that peaceful assembly is a fundamental right, the court said the right is “neither absolute nor unlimited” and must be exercised in a manner consistent with public policy and the rights of others.
The court warned that roadblocks, forced business closures and disruptions to supply routes fall outside constitutional protections. “The exercise of a fundamental right cannot be permitted in a manner which substantially impairs or destroys the fundamental rights guaranteed to others,” it said.
It further noted that attempts to secure constitutional changes through coercive means are “legally unenforceable” and inconsistent with the rule of law. “The Constitution protects peaceful dissent; it does not protect conduct that undermines public order,” the statement added.
The court also emphasized the constitutional requirement to hold timely elections with reference to Article 22(1). 4, which mandates that general elections must be carried out within the prescribed period.
Describing the obligation as mandatory and non-negotiable, the court said constitutional timelines “admit no exception” and cannot be delayed due to political uncertainty or public agitation.
It directed the Electoral Commission and the relevant executive authorities to ensure that free, fair and transparent elections are conducted within the constitutional mandate while maintaining the necessary conditions for voting.
The court traced the historical development of refugee representation, noting that refugee seats have existed in various forms since 1960 and have been consistently maintained through successive constitutional and legal frameworks.
It described the arrangement as a “continuously affirmed constitutional principle” reflecting the political status of displaced Kashmiris, and said its uninterrupted continuation demonstrates that refugee representation is a “deep-rooted constitutional obligation” rather than a temporary administrative measure.
The court reiterated that its opinion is advisory in nature and does not create enforceable orders between the parties. It said the purpose of the reference was to assist constitutional authorities rather than to decide a dispute in the conventional sense.
The ruling comes two days after the AJK government declared JAAC a banned organization and accused it of being involved in terrorism, promoting hatred and fomenting anarchy ahead of the group’s planned June 9 protest.
The move also came hours after the AJK Election Commission announced that parliamentary elections to the Legislative Assembly will be held on July 27. The commission said preparations were underway to ensure transparent, orderly and impartial elections under judicial supervision.
Meanwhile, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) criticized the government’s decision to ban JAAC.
“If JAAC was really a terrorist organization, why did the government spend months negotiating with it, signing agreements with it, implementing its demands, holding meetings with its leadership and treating it as a legitimate stakeholder until yesterday?” the party said in a statement.
The 12 seats
The issue of refugee representation has long been a central demand of JAAC, leading to a series of protests last year that turned violent and resulted in several deaths.
The region experienced one of its most turbulent periods in October 2025, when protests led by JAAC broke out over demands for constitutional and government reforms. At least nine people, including three policemen, were killed during the unrest.
JAAC, which organized the protests and strike, had presented a comprehensive charter of demands, including an end to the privileges enjoyed by the ruling elite, the abolition of 12 assembly spaces reserved for refugees and the abolition of the quota system.
Two days after the violence, the government and JAAC reached an agreement covering 12 core points and 13 additional points. Under the agreement, both sides agreed to set up a high-level committee to look into the issue of refugee seats in the AJK Legislative Assembly.
The unrest also triggered political upheaval in the region. The Pakistan Peoples Party subsequently moved a no-confidence motion against the then Prime Minister Chaudhry Anwarul Haq, with the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz joining the effort. Haq, who had been elected in April 2023 with 48 votes, chose to face the vote rather than resign.
On 17 November, Raja Faisal Mumtaz Rathore secured 36 votes in the election and became the 16th Prime Minister of AJK.
With elections now approaching and the refugee seat issue still unresolved, the AJK government convened an All Parties Conference (APC) in Muzaffarabad to build consensus. Almost all major parties participated – except PTI and JAAC, which boycotted it.
JAAC’s position is that the government had already rejected its written proposal submitted on May 30, so it would be futile to participate. It had proposed either to retain token refugee representation until the Kashmir dispute is permanently resolved, or to replace the 12 seats in the Assembly with 4 seats in the AJK Council – a body headed by the Prime Minister, which it argued would better preserve the political dimension of the Kashmir issue.
The APC rejected any change outside the constitutional and legislative framework, saying only the elected assembly could change refugee seating arrangements. The JAAC called the resolution “a page and a half of completely trivial lines” and accused participants of coming together to serve their own interests rather than those of the public.
