first quote a law from pakistani constitution similar to article 370 which prohibits Migration.
To continue from where I left off, Article 370 does not prohibit migration. Get your facts correct first.
It prevents law-making for J&K by the Indian Parliament. Lots of difference between what you think it says, and what it says. That's why it is good for you to read the original act for yourself before rushing into print.
Second, on both sides of the LOC, migration is forbidden by the same law: a 1927 local act of the principality of Kashmir which became part of the Ranvir Code. It remains valid in India, it remains valid in Pakistan. The Indian act of the J&K state assembly did not go through, since the lower house passed it but the upper house didn't, so the only act forbidding migration in India as in Pakistan is the 1927 act.
secondly, you are not aware of sectarian violence in Azad Kashmir I suppose, please study that.
I am aware that there is Shia-Sunni tension, just as there is Shia-Sunni tension throughout south Asia, including in Lucknow. What of it? There is nothing specific to Azad Kashmir.
Common sense is indeed a substitute for facts which rise from common sense, which says Pakistan is master of demography change and psychological warfare through use of religion and sects which has created problem for non Muslims in kashmir.
Once you have substituted 'common sense' for facts, you need not go further. Your views are worth nothing much more than that self-confessed level.
There was no question of Pakistan's mastery of demographic change and psychological warfare through use of religion and sects causing problems for non-Muslims in Kashmir. You may be referring to the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits. That was an act of prejudice and bigotry of the Kashmiri Muslims, inspired though it might have been by the Hurriyat.
It can hardly be equated to anything in the Pakistani side, where there was no similar Pandit population. Who were the victims of this masterly use of demographic change and psychological warfare, on the Pakistani side? If you are referring to the native Muslim population of Kashmir, that can refer to only one of three regions: the Mirpur fringe, which was always of different ethnic stock from the Valley, Gilgit and Baltistan, largely Shia, largely ethnically identical to the people of Kargil on the Indian side, and the formerly subordinate pockets such as Chitral, which were separated from Kashmir in 1947 itself by their rebellion against the Dogra Durbar. None of these have seen mass migration, by any accounts.
Apart from the vivid imagination of some armchair pundits who don't have a clue as to actual conditions prevailing, what is this demographic change you are referring to?
You would do very well if you would first learn what Article 370 is, in the first place. Otherwise for you to argue that it does India various good things does seem slightly strange.
According to Indian members @
Joe Shearer such determination does not exist because it is a bilateral talks and no 3rd party like UN will interfere. So no more plebiscite.
Yes, that is correct.
Secondly fatwas are done by many madrasas but madrasas are independent from each other so their fatwas can hardly influence the whole nation. You are the one making the claim that the demographics have been changed so the burden of proof is on you, not us. Btw the UN only stated that the tribesmen had to return and that was in 1948, they have never stated that the demographics have been changed in any year after. This is usually claimed only by Indians. The Northern Areas were always called Gilgit-Baltistan that is their historical name, we did not change anything the people themselves call themselves Gilgiti or Balti.
.
