There has never been a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiris regarding accession. India has claimed that legislative elections were sufficient to serve as a plebiscite proving that Kashmiris wish to remain in India. This might be true except for some important considerations of the details in Kashmir. [22] Only one set of elections held in Jammu and Kashmir was even arguably fair: the elections of 1977. However, Other than the elections of 1977, there has been widespread election rigging and intimidation of voters. Indeed, Even the 1977 election, it is argued by some, was accompanied by brutality and intimidation, contrary to the claims of many pro-Indian writers. One of the principle methods of insuring victory for Sheikh Abdullahs National Conference was the careful screening of which candidates were even allowed on the ballot. Few opposition parties made it. Thus, elections did not provide an opportunity for the Kashmiri populace to express its opinions; there were not enough options on the ballot between which to choose.[23]
In the 1977 elections Sheikh Abdullahs National Conference party won 48 seats in a house of 76. The Janata Party, which ruled in New Delhi, won 13 seats; Congress 12, and the Jamaat-I-Islami won one. There is a context here. Regarding the Indian Constitution that was drafted in January 1950, it contained special provisions relating to Jammu and Kashmir. While Article I declared the state an integral part of the Indian Union, Article 370 conferred upon it special status unlike any other state in the Union. Officially, the constitution stipulated that the powers of the Indian Union Parliament in Jammu and Kashmir were limited to defense, external affairs, and communications. The framers of the constitution felt that, if they did not grant the minimal autonomy of Article 370, Sheikh Abdullah might declare that Kashmir wished to join Pakistan. Sheikh Abdullahs winning National Conference party ferociously contested the Government of Indias official stand on Kashmir, stating that the issue of accession had yet to be settled. In scores of speeches, Sheikh Abdullah and his lieutenants pronounced that: This [1977] election was in fact an anti-India vote. Indeed, participation in the Indian political system did not necessarily imply endorsement of that system, but instead indicated that candidates with their own agenda were ready to follow the rules in order to gain power in accordance with the reality of the situation in Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah, for example, seemed, in many ways, to have been a puppet of New Delhi. But he always remained a thorn in their side by asserting that Kashmir deserved either independence or autonomy. Thus, even though Sheikh Abdullah accommodated himself extensively to Indian rule in Kashmir and was willing to contest (not to mention rig) elections, he never gave up the belief that Kashmiris retained the right to self-determination and had yet to express their preference in a suitable manner.[24]
We should also consider what occurred after Sheikh Abdullah was brought to power in the 1977 elections. Indira Gandhi agreed with Sheikh Abdullah in 1975 that he could return to power in exchange for his cooperation in permanently integrating Jammu and Kashmir into the Indian Union. The plan backfired, however, when Abdullah held elections in 1977 and won by a landslide. Following the election, Sheikh Abdullah began a policy of exceptionally dictatorial measures.[25] Sheikh Abdullah imposed press censorship, expanded the police powers of detention for up to two years without appeal, commanded his Cabinet members to swear an oath of loyalty to him personally, and generally moved towards one-party rule in the state.[26]
Sheikh Abdullahs son, Farooq Abdullah, was then passed on the reigns of power from his father in 1981. Abdullah won the 1983 elections amidst widespread violence and hints of rigging.[27] Farooq Abdullah was soon removed in a carefully planned coup engineered by the Indian Governor of Jammu and Kashmir. On 31 July 1984, Governor Malhotra Jagmohan swore in a true puppet government under G.M. Shah. By 1986, however, the Shah administration had shown its inability to curb the rising violence in the State. Jagmohan announced the imposition of direct Governors rule and suspension of the Legislative Assembly on 7 March, 1986. In September, direct rule from New Delhi was imposed.[28] Rajiv Gandhi attempted to manufacture a semblance of a genuine democratic process by convincing Farooq Abdullah to run in the 1987 elections. However, Farooq Abdullah has admitted that the 1987 elections were entirely unfair, having been covertly rigged.[29]
Indias rigging of elections has been consistent and systematic. For instance, with respect to the 1951 elections held for a Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly in order to give legitimacy to Sheikh Abdullahs regime, Alastair Lamb records: In theory its members had been freely elected by secret ballot in a manner hitherto unknown in the state; but somehow Sheikh Abdullahs National Conference Party and those sympathetic to it won all the seats for which they were candidates... Under 5% of the potential electorate [universal adult suffrage] actually voted... No less than seventy-three delegates were returned unopposed; and the whole process was boycotted by the only other tolerably organized party in the State, the Praja Parishad (associated with Jana Sangh in India) which represented the Hindus of Jammu (with a measure of Sikh support), after the nominations for all twenty-seven of its candidates had been rejected.[30] Although Sheikh Abdullahs sentiments favoured Kashmiri independence from India, his regime was far from democratic: the State High Court was effectively shut down, senior appointments were doled out to his clients, trade concessions were sold for personal profit, and potential rivals to the Sheikhs leadership were allowed to rot in jail.[31]
This was the type of democratic regime Sheikh Abdullah ran and continued to run. Lamb further notes that The elections of 1957 and 1962 were carefully managed and opposition groups were unable to participate effectively.[32] Noted jurist of the Bombay High Court, A.G. Noorani, has similarly commented in The Statesman, that Sheikh Abdullah rigged the polls with merciless efficiency, drawing grateful applause from Nehru. His advice to the Sheikhs successor, Bakhshi Ghulam Mohammad, was not to refrain from rigging, but to leave just a few seats for the Opposition and thus provide a fig-leaf to cover the nudity of ravaged credibility. The advice was repeated later by one of Indira Gandhis closest advisors. Indian Home Minister, Mr. Inderjit Gupta, while talking to the press in August of 1996, and as reported by the BBC India Service, testified that in Jammu and Kashmir all elections held to date were rigged to serve the interests of successive Congress governments.[33] We should hence take note of Kashmir specialist Singh Oberois observation that: Muslim Kashmiris have always challenged the Instrument of Accession; India regards it as final
