Disruptions in Kashmir in the past yet to be acknowledged: Retd justice S K Kaul on need for Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Justice- SK Kaul speaks of why he recommended setting up a 'truth and reconciliation' commission

Speaking to Moneycontrol about why he recommended the government form a ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ in Kashmir, retired Supreme Court judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul noted that the disruptions in the Kashmir valley during the late 1980s and early 1990s are yet to be acknowledged, adding that these disruptions were caused both by state and non-state actors.

He said, “There have been no acknowledgements of why it (disruptions) happened or how it happened. When endeavours are made on this front, it is labelled as only agenda but people suffered on both sides, and somebody has to acknowledge it. The whole principle of truth and reconciliation commission is that you are not punishing anybody, you are giving balm by acknowledging what happened.”

Kaul, who hails from Kashmir, in his judgment upholding the government’s decision to scrap Article 370, suggested setting up a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Jammu and Kashmir. The commission should look into the acts of violation of human rights by state and also non-state actors since the 1980s, he had said.

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, many members of the Hindu community in the valley migrated out after some members of the community were targeted following the eruption of militancy in 1989. These members, who left in a hurry owing to a threat to their lives, left behind their properties.

Kaul noted that those who chose to stay behind also faced an equal number of difficulties as the army moved into the valley to eliminate militancy. He said, “The army was called in, and the situation became so alarming that the paramilitary forces were defending the country. They (army) have their own method of fighting a war. It is not a law and order problem; it’s a war, and in the process, people who stayed back were affected.”

In his judgment, Kaul had noted that the commission must be set up before ‘memory escapes’ and the exercise must be time-bound. The judgment said, “There is an entire generation of youth that has grown up with a feeling of distrust, and it is to them that we owe the greatest day of liberation."

He said, “Over 30 years have passed; a whole generation has grown without ever knowing how they lived peacefully together earlier. Things tapered down, but I believe it’s time to go ahead.” Noting that there should be more than a criminal trial or collection of evidence in such cases, he said, “There should be a mechanism to provide some balm to the people who have suffered, which offers at least an acknowledgement of something that has happened.”

Stating that the thought of recommending the formation of a truth and reconciliation commission was on his mind even before the hearing could take place, he said, “I have heard of our country going through turmoil in 1947; my family also bore the brunt of it in some way. In 1990, I saw what happened in Kashmir. I never thought this kind of disruption would take place. Nearly 4.5 lakh people migrated from Kashmir; I thought nobody attended to their problems.”

Kaul opined that the initial migration was the result of non-state action, and then state action took place, which resulted in the disruption of the lives of those who stayed back in Kashmir. He said, “I was concerned about both sections of society. To move ahead, you have to forgive and forget at some point in time. But it can’t just be forgiven and forgotten if you don’t acknowledge what happened; it is this process that was in my mind.”