JKJAAC Rejects Allegations Linking Peaceful Rights Movement to Arms Network and Demands Evidence Be Produced Before a Court

The Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC) categorically rejects attempts to associate an entire peaceful public movement with alleged criminal activities on the basis of untested claims, recorded conversations and statements presented through a press conference.

9/19/20266 min read

The Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC) categorically rejects attempts to portray its peaceful, democratic and rights-based movement as an armed or militant organisation.

At a press conference in Islamabad on 16 September 2026, Pakistan’s Minister of State for Interior, Talal Chaudhry made a series of extremely serious allegations concerning an alleged weapons network and sought to link individuals allegedly associated with JKJAAC to that network.

The Minister alleged that a man identified as Zia had been involved in the illegal weapons trade for several years and had supplied weapons to individuals allegedly associated with JKJAAC. He further alleged that Zia was in contact with Majid, whom he described as being close to Sardar Amaan. The Minister also referred to alleged audio recordings and information said to have been recovered during the investigation.

These are grave accusations. They cannot, however, be transformed into established facts simply by repeating them at a government press conference.

If the Government possesses credible evidence of criminal activity, it must place that evidence before a competent court, where it can be independently examined, challenged and tested in accordance with law.

A press conference is not a courtroom. An allegation is not a conviction.

Majid Has Publicly Denied the Allegations

A central individual referred to during the Minister’s press conference was Majid.

Majid has subsequently issued a video statement in which he has denied the allegations being associated with him.

According to Majid, he has been suffering from a stomach-related illness for approximately the past five weeks.

Majid has also publicly questioned the reliability of Zia, stating, on the basis of his own knowledge of him, that Zia is not mentally well.

JKJAAC does not make any medical determination regarding Zia and does not present Majid’s statement as a medical diagnosis.

However, where the Government seeks to rely upon statements, alleged admissions, recordings or information attributed to an individual whose mental condition has now publicly been questioned, serious questions arise regarding the circumstances in which such evidence was obtained and its reliability.

The Government should therefore disclose:

whether Zia has undergone an independent medical and psychological assessment;
whether any statement attributed to him was made while he was in custody;
whether he had access to independent legal representation;
whether any alleged confession or statement was recorded before a judicial magistrate;
whether the alleged audio recordings have been subjected to independent forensic authentication;
whether the voices contained in those recordings have been independently verified;
whether complete recordings will be produced before a court rather than selected excerpts being presented to the media; and
whether Majid has been formally charged with any offence and, if so, what evidence has been presented against him before a court.

Majid’s public denial must form part of any fair consideration of the allegations made against him.

What Action Has Been Taken Against the Government Employees and Political Facilitators Alleged by the Minister?

The Minister’s own account raises another fundamental issue which cannot be ignored.

Talal Chaudhry alleged that a government employee named Akbar played an important role in transporting weapons and was able to use the cover of his institution or official position in doing so.

The Minister further stated that members of the political class, and government employees, were involved in or provided support to what he described as a wider “terror-crime network”.

If these allegations are true and supported by the evidence which the Government says it possesses, JKJAAC asks:

Where is Akbar?

Has he been arrested?

If not, why not?

Which government department, institution or agency employed him?

Has he been suspended from his position?

Has an FIR been registered against him?

Has he been produced before a competent court?

Has his alleged use of an official position or institutional cover been investigated?

The Minister himself alleged that this individual was able to transport weapons while benefiting from official cover which allegedly enabled him to pass through checkpoints.

That raises obvious further questions.

If weapons were allegedly being transported through multiple checkpoints, what investigation has been conducted into how those movements were possible?

Which officials were responsible for those checkpoints?

Have they been questioned?

Was there negligence, facilitation, abuse of official authority or any wider institutional failure?

These matters cannot simply disappear from the investigation while the entire public narrative is directed towards JKJAAC.

Which Politicians Is the Minister Referring To?

Talal Chaudhry also publicly stated that members of the political class were involved in the alleged wider network.

JKJAAC therefore asks the Government to clarify:

Which politicians or political figures is the Minister referring to?

Have any of them been identified?

Have they been questioned?

Have their financial records or communications been investigated?

Have any of them been arrested?

Has any criminal case been registered against them?

If the Minister possesses evidence against politicians, government employees and other facilitators, the law must apply equally to them.

There cannot be one standard for persons the Government seeks to associate with JKJAAC and another standard for government employees, officials or politicians alleged by the Minister himself to have facilitated the same network.

JKJAAC Has Publicly Rejected Armed and Militant Activity

Attempts to portray JKJAAC as an armed movement are also inconsistent with the clear and repeated public position expressed by its leadership.

In a public address, Umar Nazir Kashmiri, Member of the JKJAAC Core Committee, directly addressed allegations that the movement contained militants or was engaged in an armed struggle.

Speaking before participants who had attended the 27 July gathering and Long March, Umar Nazir Kashmiri asked whether their march had been peaceful and whether any participant had been carrying a firearm. Those present responded that the march had been peaceful.

He then stated unequivocally:

“We are struggling for our fundamental rights peacefully — completely peacefully.”

He went further and publicly declared that whether an individual belonged to the TTP, any other armed organisation, or any militant group, if anyone carried out an armed action independently, at someone’s direction or at someone’s instigation, JKJAAC had no connection whatsoever with such activity.

He stated that anyone undertaking such action would be responsible for their own conduct.

Umar Nazir Kashmiri also repeatedly urged supporters to exercise patience, restraint and steadfastness, warning them against any action that could damage the movement or undermine the sacrifices made during its peaceful struggle.

His message was clear: JKJAAC would continue its struggle politically, peacefully and through a considered strategy.

This was an explicit public rejection of militancy and armed activity by a member of JKJAAC’s Core Committee.

Where Is the Evidence of an Organisational Decision?

The Government is attempting to move from allegations concerning particular individuals to allegations against an entire organisation.

Those are two very different propositions.

If the Government alleges that JKJAAC as an organisation was involved in acquiring or supplying weapons, it must produce evidence establishing organisational responsibility.

The Government should identify:

which member of the JKJAAC Core Committee allegedly authorised the acquisition of weapons;
when and where such an instruction was allegedly issued;
whether any such decision was ever taken by the Core Committee;
whether there is any documented organisational instruction authorising armed activity;
whether JKJAAC organisational funds were used to purchase weapons;
whether any weapons were recovered from an official JKJAAC office, protest camp or authorised organisational facility;
whether there is any financial trail connecting JKJAAC funds with the alleged purchases;
and what evidence establishes a direct chain of command from the alleged weapons network to JKJAAC’s decision-making structure.

Association with an individual, acquaintance with an individual, a telephone contact, or even allegations against a particular person cannot automatically establish the criminal responsibility of an entire mass political movement.

Individual responsibility must remain individual unless evidence proves otherwise.

Produce the Complete Evidence — Not Selected Material at a Press Conference

The Government has referred publicly to mobile-phone data, alleged conversations, intelligence information and statements attributed to arrested persons.

If that material is genuine and proves what the Government claims, there should be no difficulty in placing it before an independent judicial forum.

JKJAAC therefore calls for:

the complete evidential record concerning the allegations to be presented before a competent court;
independent forensic examination of all alleged audio recordings and digital material;
disclosure of the legal status and custody of the individuals named publicly by the Government;
access to legal representation for all accused persons;
disclosure of the action taken against the government employee and political facilitators referred to by the Minister;
investigation of how alleged weapons were able to pass through checkpoints using purported official cover;
independent scrutiny of statements obtained from persons in custody; and
a transparent judicial process in which both the allegations and the Government’s evidence can be properly tested.

If the Government believes its evidence is strong enough to criminalise an organisation representing a mass public movement, that evidence should withstand examination before a court.

Peaceful Political Mobilisation Must Not Be Criminalised

JKJAAC emerged from longstanding public concerns relating to electricity tariffs, wheat subsidies, taxation, governance, representation, public resources and fundamental economic, civil and democratic rights.

Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people have participated in peaceful demonstrations and public mobilisation around these demands.

The existence of allegations against particular individuals cannot erase the peaceful character of that wider movement.

Nor can untested allegations against individuals be used as a basis for collectively branding peaceful protesters, women, elderly people, young people, workers, traders and ordinary citizens as militants or terrorists.

JKJAAC reiterates that anyone credibly accused of committing a criminal offence should be investigated through lawful procedures, regardless of their identity or affiliation.

That principle must apply equally to JKJAAC members, government employees, politicians, officials and every other person.

There must be no selective accountability.

There must be no trial by media.

There must be no collective punishment.

And there must be no attempt to criminalise peaceful political dissent through allegations that have yet to be tested before an independent court.

JKJAAC remains committed to the peaceful, political and democratic struggle for the fundamental rights of the people of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

The Committee calls upon journalists, lawyers, human rights organisations, civil society and independent observers to scrutinise these allegations carefully and to distinguish between government claims, independently established evidence and judicially proven facts.

Produce the evidence before a court.
Investigate every alleged facilitator equally.
And do not criminalise an entire peaceful movement on the basis of untested allegations.

Supporting Video Statements

Majid – public video statement responding to the allegations:
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1Eukef9PWC/
Umar Nazir Kashmiri, JKJAAC Core Committee Member – public statement reaffirming JKJAAC’s peaceful position and rejecting any connection with armed or militant activity:
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1JTwSuYkxj/

Quick links

CONTACT US

Email:

admin@jkjaac.co