SRINAGAR: Kashmir High Court Bar Association on Thursday expressed its surprise over the statement by government of India regarding Kashmir dispute even as it maintained that its resolution lies in United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
While appreciating statements of some of parliament members who “candidly” supported cause of people of Kashmir, and even some of whom suggested solution by adopting Irish model, the lawyers body said that suppressing voice of people by the use of military might was by no means a solution to the long pending issue.
In a statement issued here, a spokesman of the lawyers’ body Shimla agreement signed by the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan on July 2, 1972, “which is often referred to by India was arrived at the back of people of Jammu and Kashmir, is binding upon them.”
The spokesman said that the agreement also shows that the principles and purpose of the charter of United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries, which in other words means that the resolution passed by the Security Council on Kashmir are binding on them.
The lawyers’ body said that it feels that reference to settle their “differences” in peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon by them is not also applicable to Kashmir because Kashmir is internationally accepted dispute and not a difference between the two countries which can be resolved trough bilateral negotiations.
“If it were not so then in Shimla agreement itself, it would not have been stated that in J&K the LOC, resulting from the ceasefire December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side,” the spokesman said.
The Bar association also maintains that “struggle for freedom” of people of Kashmir is an indigenous one and Kashmir in no way is internal matter of India.
“If it were so, then the United Nations Military observers Group would not have continued to be stationed on both sides of LOC and the United Nation in terms of resolution dated 13 August 1948 would not have directed the military observers Group to supervise the observance of Cease Fire order,” the spokesman added.