Land theft - Mirpur

A Palestinian once remarked that unlike the theft of personal objects, which can be sold to faraway buyers or hidden, this is not possible with land. There is a constant reminder that that land over there has our ancestors footprints on its every inch. There it stands as a torturous reminder about which nothing can be done. I do not believe that analogies are always accurate and do not want to belittle the huge plight of the Palestinians. Nevertheless, this is the sort of feeling many people from Mirpur and its Dadyal sub-district now feel with land theft on the rise.

Various factors have colluded to create demand for premium land. This includes plans to raise the dam and a general demand from British Mirpuris keen to build palatial residences. Into this mix fall some very archaic land laws, which include various levels of ownership, occupation and land use. Throw in venal politicians from all parties and none and you have the making of a society not too different from the wild west.

The most pernicious factor in this mix are corrupt land administrators, known as patwari, and politicians. The former are all too happy to fill their pockets with backhanders and the word patwari is almost a swear word often used as a synonym for dishonesty in general. The latter are keen to reward loyal supporters and those who spend money on their campaigns; they have very few scruples about playing with land that does not belong to them – as if it is their personal fiefdom to distribute as they wish.

Beholden

There is an on and off debate in the UK about how parties should be funded. Should they receive state aid, corporate backing or donations from individuals and what should be the limits? Similar problems, but only more serious, prevail back in Mirpur – except that there is no debate about these matters. No one bothers to ask whether democracy is not rendered pointless if individuals can spend many lakhs of rupees on their favourite candidate.

Let me spell out the issue. At election times in Azad Kashmir, hundreds of individuals go from the UK to back their candidate. Some spend many lakhs of rupees on their man – the cost of running public events, food, transport, and even for outright bribery of village elders who control significant vote banks. Successful candidates are bound to feel obligated to reward their backers. With corporate backing, at least the relationship is a touch impersonal. When a selection of well off individuals are your main backers, the relationship is very personal and it is well nigh impossible for the politician not to feel beholden to such people.

Even if a politician is whiter than white, and this is a ridiculous concession for a to-the-core-corrupt system that is AJK, it would still be impossible not to feel at least a tinge of obligation. In the real world of AJK politics, where there is only variation in the degree of turpitude, it is in fact more than a tinge of obligation. Backers are given free rein to enrich themselves. This includes control of local funds and acquiring land that belongs to others.