Kashmir Under UAPA: How India's Anti-Terror Law Silences Dissent

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: 'Hope' - www.david baxendale.co.uk

In Kashmir, speaking out can cost years of freedom. Being photographed at a protest, writing a news article, or posting a social media message can lead to arrest under the India Kashmir UAPA — the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. This is India's main anti-terror law. Rights groups call it "draconian." Since 2019, the government has used it heavily against Kashmiri journalists, lawyers, activists, and ordinary protesters.

This article explains how the UAPA works in Kashmir, who is being targeted, and why many Kashmiris now seek international protection. For asylum practitioners and expert witnesses, understanding the UAPA is essential for any case involving a Kashmiri Muslim, a journalist, or a person accused of "anti-national" activity in India.

Background: Article 370 and the 2019 Lockdown

On 5 August 2019, the Indian government revoked Article 370 of the Constitution. This article had given Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) a special status since 1950. The move ended the state's limited autonomy. J&K was split into two "Union Territories" — Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh — both directly ruled from New Delhi. The decision was taken without consulting Kashmiri representatives.[1]

The government acted in secret. Hours before the announcement, the Home Minister ordered a communications blackout. Mobile phones, landlines, and the internet were cut. Thousands of additional troops were sent in. Political leaders — including three former chief ministers — were placed under house arrest or detained. Protests were banned. Schools were closed. For weeks, Kashmir was cut off from the rest of India and the world.[2]

The internet blackout lasted over 550 days in some districts, the longest in any democracy. The UN Special Rapporteurs called the action "collective punishment." Journalists could not file stories. Patients could not reach hospitals. Moreover, the government used this period to arrest thousands of people under preventive detention laws and, increasingly, under the UAPA.[3]

UAPA Explained: What the Law Does

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 was first passed in the 1960s to ban "unlawful" organisations. Over time, Parliament has amended it many times. The most important change came in 2019. The UAPA (Amendment) Act 2019 allows the government to designate an individual as a "terrorist" — not just an organisation. No trial or conviction is required. The Home Minister simply adds the person to a schedule.[4]

Key features of the UAPA make it especially harsh. Police can detain a person without filing charges for up to 180 days (regular criminal law allows 90 days). Section 43D(5) effectively blocks bail. Judges must assume the prosecution's allegations are true when deciding on bail. This was confirmed by the Supreme Court in NIA v Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2019). As a result, UAPA accused often spend years in jail waiting for trial. Sentences range from 5 years to life imprisonment, with the death penalty in some cases.[5]

UAPA in Kashmir: The Numbers

UAPA use in Kashmir has risen sharply since 2019. According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, authorities filed more than 2,300 UAPA cases in Jammu and Kashmir between 2019 and 2022. In 2020 alone, J&K accounted for nearly half of all UAPA cases in India. The numbers fell slightly in 2023-2024 but remain very high for a territory with only about 13 million people.[6]

Who Is Targeted?

The UAPA has been used against a wide range of people in Kashmir. Authorities argue they are fighting terrorism. In practice, the net is wide and captures journalists, lawyers, students, and even teenagers. Notable cases include:

Journalists. Fahad Shah, editor of The Kashmir Walla, spent almost two years in jail under the UAPA for articles his outlet published. Pulitzer-winning photojournalist Sanna Irshad Mattoo was prevented from travelling to the United States. Irfan Mehraj, who worked with rights activist Khurram Parvez, was arrested in 2023 under the UAPA for his journalism. Aasif Sultan spent over five years in jail for an article about a militant. The Committee to Protect Journalists documented these cases in detail.[7]

Human rights defenders. Khurram Parvez, coordinator of the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), has been in jail since November 2021. He is widely regarded as Kashmir's most prominent human rights defender. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called for his release. He remains in detention under the UAPA as of 2025.[8]

Lawyers and students. Lawyers defending UAPA accused have themselves been booked under the law. Students sharing social media posts have been arrested. In 2022, authorities charged two journalism students at Kashmir University over a WhatsApp message. Consequently, self-censorship is widespread.

Protesters. Even ordinary people attending a protest can be charged. Stone-pelting — a common form of protest in Kashmir — has been treated as a terrorist act under Section 15. Teenagers photographed at gatherings have been booked. Families often do not know where their relatives are held for days.

Low Conviction Rate: A Tool of Pre-Trial Punishment

The NCRB's own data show that UAPA convictions are very rare. Across India, the conviction rate is about 2-3%. In J&K, the figure is similarly low. Yet acquittal comes only after years in custody. This pattern — low convictions but long detention — shows that the UAPA functions as a form of pre-trial punishment. Authorities use it to remove targets from society, even when the legal case is weak.[9]

Judges have criticised the overuse of the law. In 2023, the Bombay High Court granted bail to activist Vernon Gonsalves in the Bhima Koregaon case after five years in jail. The Court noted that mere possession of books was not a terrorist act. In 2024, the Supreme Court granted bail to several under-trial UAPA accused, citing long delays. However, these are rare exceptions. Lower courts still routinely deny bail under Section 43D(5).

The UAPA has effectively turned the fundamental principle of 'bail, not jail' on its head. It allows for indefinite pre-trial detention on the basis of vaguely worded charges and without any meaningful judicial scrutiny.
Amnesty International, 'India: Weaponising Counter-Terrorism' (2023)

The AFSPA Parallel: Military Impunity

The UAPA does not operate alone. In Kashmir, it works alongside the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1990 (AFSPA). This law gives the Indian Army sweeping powers in areas declared "disturbed." Soldiers can arrest without warrant. They can shoot to kill on suspicion. Moreover, they cannot be prosecuted in civilian courts without permission from the central government. Such permission is almost never granted.[10]

The combined effect is severe. The UAPA targets civilians expressing dissent. The AFSPA shields soldiers who commit abuses. Kashmiri families have documented thousands of cases of enforced disappearance over decades. The Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) records more than 8,000 cases since 1989. In most cases, there has been no effective investigation. Mass graves have been identified in northern districts.

Impact on Families and Communities

When one person is booked under the UAPA, the whole family suffers. Relatives are questioned, sometimes detained. Property can be seized under "terror funding" provisions. Passports are cancelled. Family members are stopped from travelling abroad. In 2022, Kashmiri student Aaqib Majeed was prevented from taking up a scholarship in the UK because of a police "lookout notice" linked to a relative's UAPA case.[11]

Community impact is also visible. Journalists have stopped reporting critically. Lawyers refuse UAPA cases out of fear. Civil society groups like JKCCS and APDP operate under constant pressure. The Kashmir Times newspaper, published for over 70 years, was effectively shut down in 2020 when its office in Srinagar was sealed. Local editors have been summoned for questioning repeatedly.

International Attention

The UN has repeatedly raised concerns. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) published two reports on Kashmir, in 2018 and 2019. Both documented serious abuses by Indian security forces and called for an international commission of inquiry. The Indian government rejected both reports. In 2020, a group of UN Special Rapporteurs wrote to India about Khurram Parvez's case and others. They called the UAPA "incompatible with international human rights standards."[12]

The European Parliament, in its December 2022 resolution, expressed concern about Kashmir. The US State Department's annual Human Rights Reports cite the UAPA as a tool of repression. Reporters Without Borders ranked India 159 out of 180 in its 2024 Press Freedom Index, citing Kashmir as a major reason. For a full picture of country conditions, see our country reports.

Asylum Implications

Kashmiri asylum claims can be framed under several 1951 Refugee Convention grounds. Political opinion applies to journalists, activists, and anyone who has expressed views critical of the Indian government's policy on Kashmir. Religion applies because the overwhelming majority of targeted Kashmiris are Muslims in a Hindu-majority state. Nationality or ethnicity — Kashmiri identity — is itself treated as suspicious by Indian security agencies. Particular social group (PSG) arguments also succeed for subgroups such as "Kashmiri journalists," "Kashmiri human rights defenders," and "relatives of UAPA accused."[13]

For practitioners, the key task is to build country evidence. Relevant material includes the OHCHR Kashmir reports, NCRB statistics, case studies from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and testimony from families of UAPA accused. The asylum guide provides detailed drafting advice. Moreover, our human rights analysis covers the broader context of repression in India under the current government.

Internal relocation is usually not a safe option. The UAPA is a central law — not a state law. The NIA has national reach. Passport controls, Aadhaar-linked records, and police "history sheets" follow a person across India. For active human rights defenders and journalists, continued activity in another state is also restricted. As a result, in most Kashmir UAPA cases, internal relocation will not meet the standard of safety and reasonableness required under UK and EU law.

Conclusion

The UAPA has become India's main tool for silencing dissent in Kashmir. The 2019 amendment, the revocation of Article 370, and years of communication blackouts created an environment of fear. Hundreds of journalists, lawyers, students, and activists have been detained. Conviction rates are tiny, but detention lasts years. The law fails every test of proportionality under international human rights standards. In Kashmir, it has become a weapon against an entire population.

For those who flee, international protection is essential. Decision-makers should treat Kashmiri asylum claims with the same care given to claims from other politically repressed regions. The evidence base from UN bodies, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, RSF, and Indian civil society is extensive. Our expert witness service supports practitioners building these cases. Freedom of expression, assembly, and association are not terrorism — yet in Kashmir under UAPA, they are treated as such.