The call for a strike by the Joint Public Action Committee in Azad Jammu and Kashmir on June 9 has sparked an important public debate: will repeated shutdowns truly secure public rights or will they primarily hurt ordinary Kashmiris struggling to earn a living in difficult economic conditions?
Public demands and peaceful protest are legitimate democratic rights. Citizens have every right to ask for accountability, transparency and better implementation of government commitments. However, the real concern is whether frequent strikes and market closures are helping resolve issues or creating additional hardship for the very people they claim to represent.
The people of Azad Jammu and Kashmir hold a special place in Pakistan’s national and emotional consciousness. Despite Pakistan’s economic challenges, the federal government has continued to provide substantial financial assistance, subsidies and development support to the region. At a time when ordinary Pakistanis in many parts of the country are facing expensive electricity, inflation, rising taxes and economic pressure, Azad Kashmir continues to receive subsidized flour, concessional electricity and special development grants designed to reduce the burden on the public. This support is not symbolic. It reflects Pakistan’s long-standing political, economic and moral commitment to the people of Kashmir. Billions of rupees are allocated through grants, subsidies and development programs to strengthen infrastructure, improve public services and support economic stability in the region. In such circumstances, the question arises whether repeated strikes are the most effective way to address public concerns.
Whenever markets shut down, roads are blocked and transport is disrupted, the first victims are not the powerful elite but ordinary citizens. Small shopkeepers lose business, daily wage labourers lose income and transport workers lose earnings needed to feed their families. A single day of shutdown may not affect wealthy individuals significantly but it can deeply impact workers who depend on daily income for survival.
The social consequences are equally serious. Patients face difficulty reaching hospitals, students suffer interruptions in education and examinations, and business activity slows down. Rather than accelerating economic relief, prolonged disruptions often weaken local commerce and increase uncertainty among the public.
If there are shortcomings in implementation, delays in relief measures or administrative inefficiencies, these issues should certainly be questioned. However, constructive engagement, transparent monitoring and responsible dialogue offer more sustainable solutions than repeated closures that paralyze daily life. Citizens should demand accountability from institutions but public pressure should be directed toward reform and implementation rather than actions that primarily damage ordinary livelihoods.
Pakistan repeatedly emphasized that public relief, development and dialogue must continue together. Development projects, welfare programs and subsidies are intended to improve the quality of life for ordinary Kashmiris, particularly during difficult economic times.
The people of Azad Kashmir deserve better healthcare, quality education, employment opportunities and economic stability. These goals are more likely to be achieved through cooperation, negotiations and institutional accountability than through repeated disruptions that deepen public hardship.
