SAE NEWS | MUZAFFARABAD | 03 AUGUST 2026
BY – FIDATO
August 02, 2026
MUZAFFARABAD — The second round of elections to the AJK Legislative Assembly was held yesterday, including elections for the 12 refugee seats. These seats had become a major point of contention after being challenged by Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC). However, JAAC’s position lacks a sound legal basis.
To understand the legal status of AJK, it is necessary to look beyond the 1974 Interim Constitution and return to the Proclamation of the Provisional Government of 24 October 1947.
The Proclamation stated:
“The new government represents the united will of the Jammu and Kashmir State to be free from the rule of the Dogra Dynasty which has long suppressed and oppressed the people.”
It further stated that the government was established:
“for the temporary purpose of restoring law and order in the State and enabling the people to elect by their free vote a popular legislature and a popular government.”
Thus, the Government claimed to represent the people of the entire State of J&K, not merely the inhabitants of the liberated territory now known as AJK. It also claimed the mandate to secure the liberation of the remaining areas.
This representative and provisional character gave the Azad Government exceptional legal and political significance.
Prior to 24 October 1947, the Maharaja was the sole ruler of J&K. Although opposition to his rule existed since 1931, his authority, and consequently the writ of the State and Government, had not been legally challenged. Under the Partition framework, he possessed the authority to accede to India.
However, the emergence of a parallel and representative Azad Government challenged the exclusivity of that authority. When the Maharaja acceded to India, the existence of a rival representative authority rendered the accession disputed and ultimately subject to a plebiscite. In this way, the principle of Self-Determination acquired practical and legal expression.
Legal Status of the Azad Government
The AJK Government and Legislative Assembly established under the 1974 Interim Constitution function as a de facto political arrangement rather than a de jure sovereign state, comparable in certain respects to entities such as Taiwan, Northern Cyprus, and Abkhazia.
This reality was acknowledged in practice by the United Nations.
In a letter dated 19 September 1948, J. Klahr Huddle, Chairman of the United Nations Commission, wrote:
“The Commission has not ignored the existence of the Azad Kashmir movement, and consideration of this matter was incorporated in Part II, A-3 of the Resolution of 13 August.”
(UNCIP Summary Record, 31 August 1948; UNSC Official Records, November 1948)
Similarly, the United Nations Commission received correspondence from Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan, President of Azad Kashmir, dated 8 July 1948.
(UNSC Official Records, November 1948, pp. 118–123)
The separate existence of the Azad Government was therefore acknowledged in practice, and the receipt of correspondence from its President reflected a form of de facto representation.
Basis of Refugee Representation
The political and constitutional structure of the Azad Government is not a creation of the 1974 Interim Constitution. It originates in the political order established in 1947, while the 1974 Constitution serves as an administrative and constitutional framework for that pre-existing structure.
Under the constitutional doctrine of Constituent Power vs. Constituted Authority, the 1947 Proclamation represents the Constituent Act, whereas the 1974 Constitution constitutes a Constituted Framework operating within that foundational order.
Accordingly, the 1974 Constitution, as a derivative institution, cannot abolish refugee representation, since both derive their legitimacy from the 1947 Proclamation.
Had representation of the non-liberated territories not been incorporated into the structure, the movement would have represented only a limited territory of Jammu and Kashmir and would have resembled a SECESSIONIST MOVEMENT rather than a movement for liberation.
The constitutions of the AJK Assembly and the Assembly of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir are internal constitutional arrangements. However, insofar as both relate to the unresolved Kashmir dispute, they remain subjects of international law.
Within this provisional structure, REFUGEE REPRESENTATION constitutes an expression of the Internal Right of Self-Determination. Under the international law principle of Continuing Political Identity, the people of a disputed territory retain their distinct political identity despite territorial division or competing administrations.
Conclusion
▪️ The Azad Government of the State of J&K is a provisional, disputed, and self-determination-based political order whose authority derives from the Constituent Power and Normative Constitutional Order established in 1947.
▪️ The AJK Legislative Assembly therefore lacks the constitutional authority to alter the foundational structure itself.
▪️ Refugee representation derives from that foundational structure and cannot be abolished through subsequent constitutional arrangements.
▪️ The Government retains its character as a representative provisional government only so long as it includes representation of the non-liberated territories through refugee seats.
▪️ Abolishing refugee seats would undermine that representative character and, under this line of reasoning, transform the movement from one based on self-determination and liberation into a secessionist movement.
▪️ Comparable arrangements have existed in other disputed or unresolved political entities, including Western Sahara, the Palestinian National Council/PLO, and the Polish Government-in-Exile.
****
Source: FIDATO / X @tequieremos
