AJK government seeks legal guidance from SC regarding refugee seats

Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) government on Thursday filed a reference in the Supreme Court (SC) under the constitutional provisions seeking constitutional and legal opinion from the apex court regarding refugee seats in the legislative Assembly

MUZAFFARABAD, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 4th Jun, 2026) Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) government on Thursday filed a reference in the Supreme Court (SC) under the constitutional provisions seeking constitutional and legal opinion from the apex court regarding refugee seats in the legislative Assembly.

The reference has been sent through the presidential office asking the apex forum to provide legal opinion regarding the constitutional position of 12 refugee seats elected from outside of the territorial jurisdiction of AJK and the framework to change the position of these seats in the legislative Assembly.

The Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), a civil society and traders joint forum has been demanding to abolish these seats since a yearlong agitation for what it describes peoples’ demands to reform the governance system in the region for the welfare of the common people.

The chief Justice of Supreme Court Justice Raja Saeed Akram Khan while entertaining the reference has constituted full bench of the apex court to hear the reference. JAAC has announced a strike and long march on 9th of this month against what they call betrayal of the government to fully implement their agreed demands. However an all parties conference (APC) of the region yesterday unanimously adopted a resolution saying that the status of these seats is protected under the constitution and any reforms needed a constitutional amendment adding that a comprehensive deliberation was necessary regarding the consequences of the change of status of these seats on implementation of UN resolutions on Kashmir.

Questions asked through the reference

Q No.1: Whether, on an analysis of Articles 22, 33 and 57 of the Constitution, any provision of the Constitution, including the twelve seats reserved for refugees from the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir under Articles 22(1)(a)(ii) and (iii), is capable of being altered, abridged or abolished otherwise than by a constitutional amendment passed in accordance with Article 33; and whether a demand to abolish such seats through coercion, brute force and the threat of mass public obstruction is constitutionally competent or legally maintainable?

Q No 2: Whether the present Legislative Assembly, having effectively completed its constitutional tenure under Article 22(3) and being on the eve of the announcement of the election schedule under Article 22(4), is constitutionally competent or institutionally suited to enter or give effect to a fundamental amendment of the character now demanded, and whether, consistently with the well-settled principle that a legislature which has lost its democratic mandate is bound to its successor (James-A-Islani v.

<?php /*?> <?php */?>

Federation of Pakistan, PLD 2009 SC 549), so fundamental a constitutional change does not properly belong to the incoming Assembly, freshly mandated by and answerable to the electorate?

Q No 3: Whether a demand to abolish so entrenched constitutional provisions by the threat or use of force, and to coerce the State into bypassing the amendment process prescribed by Article 33, amounts to subversion of the Constitution and is repugnant to the constitutional order, having regard to the ideology of the State's accession to Pakistan and the responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan under the UNCIP Resolutions (Articles 56 and 7, read with the Preamble and Part II of the Third Schedule of the Constitution)?

Q No 4: Whether freedom of assembly and association guaranteed under the Fundamental Rights (Article 4, Right 6 and 7) extends to a movement whose declared object is to obstruct, by force or threat of force, constitutionally mandated elections or to compel an extra-constitutional amendment; or whether such activity falls outside that protection and within the reasonable restrictions permissible in the interest of public order and the sovereignty and integrity of the State?

Q No 5: Whether the Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir is under a constitutional obligation to decline such extra-constitutional demands, to announce and hold the General Elections within the time prescribed by the Constitution, and to take all lawful measures available to it to preserve public order and protect the electoral process; and what is the constitutional scope of such lawful measures?