‘House Arrest’ has lost its meaning in Kashmir
JAMMU: They have again hogged the headlines, which they always crave for desperately. The administration has again injected much needed oxygen to the irrelevant politicians to make them relevant. The headline goes ‘three former chief ministers placed under house arrest’. That is exactly as per the melodrama scripted by Farooq Abdullah, Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti. They knew they wouldn’t be allowed to stage protests against the proposals of the Delimitation Commission. The government provided them the ‘face saver’, as there were just a couple of dozen protesters -who could be counted on finger tips-who were waiting for three former chief ministers to join them. First joke of the first day of 2022!
As per preliminary data, the main stream leaders like the three former chief ministers Farooq Abdullah, Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti have been placed under house arrest around eight times post abrogation of Article 370, notwithstanding the fact that the separatists are used to this measure which is just to relax and indulge in bashing of the nation and the security forces.
The question arises why the government obliges separatists, secessionists and the soft-secessionists by placing them under house arrest, knowing well that this preventive measure has lost its meaning in the Valley.
The prevailing spate of house arrest could be well defined as rest to put the unrest (if any they can cause) to rest. It is a cosy reprimand for the mischief mongers and easy duty for those guarding outside their palatial houses. The restriction is not like the one put to a Kashmir based US citizen Ghulam Nabi Fai in Washington DC some years ago, when an electronic monitoring device was fixed to him to watch his movements.
House arrest in Kashmir is to give the person involved some movements of rest from their hectic schedule of indulging in India and forces’ bashing. They can move around; draw strategies; talk to like- minded people or speak to the media.
In the instant case of three chief ministers being placed under house arrest, the UT administration must come out clean on what they have done, which entailed ‘curbs’ on their ‘liberty’ and ‘restrictions on movement’. Such claims are generally aimed at becoming heroes and relevant to the people, who have already rejected the mainstream politicians for their doublespeak. Unless any strategy is behind the ‘stoic silence’ over house arrests, the government must deny the luxury of becoming heroes to the so-called mainstream leaders of the Valley, who tend to be on both sides of the fence. Their duplicity has cost the nation heavily. They play mind games and the government indulges in hide and seek. This does not go well with the law abiding citizens, who watch desperately and helplessly this melodrama.
The government must revisit the house arrest strategy. If those being placed under house arrest have committed any violation or offence, let them be charged and prosecuted. There must be grounds, other than the preventive measure, on which this most ridiculed term ‘house arrest’ is being invoked.