Srinagar, May 17 (PTI) As the self-enumeration process for Census 2027 begins in Jammu and Kashmir, Panun Kashmir, an organisation representing displaced Kashmiri Pandits, has raised serious concerns over classification criteria of the government, stressing that describing them as "migrants" makes their forced displacement voluntary.
The new chairman of Panun Kashmir, Tito Ganju, also criticised the Centre’s policy on Kashmiri Pandits and said the demand for separate homeland in the Kashmir Valley is "non-negotiable", stressing that the decades of "flexible" policies have only made the community's displacement "acceptable".
Talking to PTI recently, Ganju, when asked why his organisation is demanding genocide classification in the 2027 Census, said, "Because everything begins there. If we are recorded as 'migrants', forced displacement is legally reframed as voluntary movement. That single distortion weakens every claim that follows."
"We expect classification as internally displaced genocide victims and survivors, linkage to original place of residence in the Kashmir Valley, distinct enumeration, and recording of duration and cause. Anything less is not error, it is dilution," he said.
Ganju observed that following the existing administrative practices is nothing but a "repetition of failure" and said the demand for creation of Panun Kashmir, a separate homeland in Kashmir with Union Territory status for Kashmiri Pandits, was not the "maximalist demand" but the "minimum framework" needed for constitutional safeguards.
According to the Relief and Rehabilitation Department of Jammu and Kashmir, 59,764 Kashmiri Pandit families left the valley because of terrorism in 1990, out of which the majority found new homes in Jammu and nearby places, whereas 23,313 families relocated to areas outside Jammu and Kashmir.
The outbreak of militancy in Jammu and Kashmir, especially in Kashmir Valley in 1989-90, resulted in the mass migration of Kashmiri Hindus, along with some Sikhs and Muslims. According to the recent report issued by the Relief Office set up in 1990, a total of 44,167 displaced Kashmiri families are registered, including 39,782 displaced Hindu families from Kashmir Valley.
Ganju took over the command of Panun Kashmir in March this year after the organisation expelled Ajay Chrungoo with immediate effect and ordered an inquiry into his alleged foreign links, including a reported interaction with US-based Pakistani ISI agent Ghulam Nabi Fai.
Asked by declaring demand for a Panun Kashmir as "non-negotiable" sounds less like constitutional reasoning and more like refusal to engage, he reasoned, "No. It sounds like the end of illusion. Engagement has already happened, repeatedly, across years, across governments, across frameworks. What you call rigidity is actually the conclusion drawn from experience."
"When every 'flexible' approach produces the same outcome -- uncertainty, vulnerability, non-return, then continuing that cycle is not pragmatism, it is denial," he said.
Invoking the historical concept of 'Jatividhwans' (genocide), Ganju pushed back against allegations of narrative overreach and pointed out that while India is a signatory to the UN Convention on Genocide, Parliament has not yet enacted corresponding domestic legislation under its Article 5 obligations.
"Article 5 obligates the State to legislate. The absence of such law does not negate the condition, it exposes the gap between obligation and implementation," he said.
The Panun Kashmir chairman, however, went on to respond diplomatically to a query about whether the government did not do enough and said, "I am saying the outcome shows that what was in place before did not secure enforceable rights. This is an objective observation, not an allegation."
A lawyer by profession, Ganju reasoned, "It is a verifiable one. If the right to reside under Article 19 (of the Constitution) was functional, we would be there. If Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) was secured, return would not be conditional. If Article 14 (Equality) was applied meaningfully, we would not be treated as a generic category. The continued absence itself is the evidence."
Ganju elaborated on how typical national welfare legislations like the National Food Security Act (NFSA) implicitly discriminate against the displaced population by virtue of provisions in NFSA sections 3, 9, 10, and 24. These make the access to food benefits contingent upon identity and residency within the state, which an exiled group lacks, he said.
"It is futile to try to improve something that fundamentally doesn't recognise the very group that it is meant for. Any improvement in such a scenario would only be superficial," Ganju noted.
"If we were to go forward in small steps, not recognising the need for a homeland structure, then displacement would continue to be normalised," he added.