LAHORE: The wife of incarcerated Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) head Yasin Malik has written to Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi, requesting him to initiate a debate on the sedition case registered against her husband in the Indian parliament.

Mushaal Hussein Mullick, in her a letter to the Congress leader, said Yasin Malik could be instrumental for bringing “organic” and not just “cosmetic” peace back to the Jammu & Kashmir, if he is freed.

In the letter, Mushaal says: “I write to you today at a point in time when my husband Yasin Malik is languishing in a god forsaken Delhi prison, not very far away from you. He is awaiting trial in a three-decade-old sedition case, in which NIA has demanded death sentence against him. Since Nov 2, he has gone on an indefinite hunger strike to protest against inhumane treatment in jail. This hunger strike will further adversely affect his well-being and put at risk the life of a man who after renouncing armed struggle chose to believe in the concept of non-violence.”

The former assistant to prime minister on human rights and women empowerment further said on the continuous persuasion of Indian civil society members, supported by diplomatic missions of USA, UK and EU stationed in New Delhi, Yasin Malik in pursuit of peace, while disregarding the political cost and the obvious risks associated with, renounced armed struggle and unilaterally declared ceasefire with India in 1994.

She said that then ambassador Kuldip Nayyar, Mr Raj Mohan Gandhi (grandson of Mahatma Gandhi), Wajahat Habib Ullah, retired Justice Madhoskar then governor of Utter Pradesh, Rajsh Pilot, then home minister, then governor of Andhra Pradesh and retired chief justice Rajinder Sachar, as special emissaries, played pivotal role in getting assurances from the government that Indian state would not only drop all past charges against Malik and his compatriots, but would also engage in a structured dialogue with him and other Kashmiri leaders to find a sustainable solution to the Kashmir conflict.

“This assurance was endorsed by American, British and European diplomats; who also met Yasin, pleading him to believe in pledge of Indian state. Yasin, being a disciple of mother harmony at heart, decided to take this bait no matter how hollow or duplicitous it seemed even back then. Ambassador Nayyar in 1999 wrote in Rediff that the first militant, Yasin Malik, who raised his gun at a public meeting in heart of Srinagar, has turned nonviolent and vegetarian. Now he is a follower of Mahatma Gandhi,” the letter reads.

Mushaal quoted Bharat Bhushan, a seasoned Indian journalist, who wrote in The Telegraph in 2007, “The President of JKLF, one of the first to wield the gun in Kashmir, is today training youngsters in nonviolent politics. He uses a curious mixture of religion, sufism and nonviolence in an attempt to build a constituency for peace in Jammu & Kashmir”.

She said Yasin Malik is a true disciple of unity in diversity, the soul of Kashmiriyat. It was his unblemished nonviolent ideology, which compelled Dr Manmohan Singh Ji, then India prime minister, to invite him on Feb 17, 2006, for initiating a dialogue between the Government of India and the people of Jammu & Kashmir, she added. Yasin offered his optimal support in the peace process.

“Rahul Ji, I recall these anecdotes not to glorify Malik but to apprise you that he stood by his end of the bargain.”

Mushaal Mullick said since 2019, aftermath of revocation of Article 370, Yasin Malik is being victimised by the BJP government in all unimaginable ways. “Yasin Malik is being tried for waging war against India in a 35-year-old case and now capital sentence is being demanded for him in concocted cases filed against him by NIA. I request you (Rahul) to bring to use your high moral and political influence in the Parliament and to initiate a debate on the case of Yasin Malik, who could become an instrument for bringing organic and not cosmetic peace back to the Jammu & Kashmir -- paradise on earth,” she pleaded.

She said the Indian parliament must debate as to whether a prisoner, regardless of the charges leveled against him, is entitled to the fundamental right of health/medical well-being or not.

Published in Dawn, November 7th, 2024