Fear and frustration

Interview with Aleem Syed, a law student from Jamia Millia Islamia.

Aleem Syed , a law graduate from Jamia Milia Islamia, was “allowed” by the Supreme Court to travel to Anantnag, after he filed a petition to the court requesting the same. He talks about his three weeks of anxiety of not being able to hear from his family, a feeling common to thousands of Kashmiris living outside the Kashmir Valley. Excerpts from his conversation with Frontline :

Before you approached the Supreme Court to facilitate your journey to Anantnag, did you try to establish contact with your family or travel to the Valley?

I last spoke to my family on the intervening night of August 4 and 5. They did not believe the rumour going around that something major was about to happen in Kashmir. Hence, they had not even been prepared to deal with the clampdown, like buying necessities in advance. This added to my fear, besides the frustration of not being able to contact my family. I had emailed the Deputy Commission of Anantnag’s office about it. They replied to that email asking my residential address, which I provided along with my mobile number. But they did not revert thereafter. I had also not been able to place a call on the helpline numbers provided by the administration; they were not working, at least not in my case.

What prompted you to seek the help of the judiciary?

There have been reports of night raids and detentions. South Kashmir is more volatile. I was restless. I thought even if there was a 50-50 chance of a remedy, why not take the legal route? I discussed the matter with senior Supreme Court advocate, Sanjay Hegde, and he was gracious enough to help. We filed a petition on August 10; the hearing took place on August 28.

Were you satisfied by the Supreme Court verdict?

There was a remedy available to me and I sought it. Tomorrow nobody should be able to ask why you did not approach the courts. I met my family and they were all very worried. They had not been able to get access to a landline phone that was working. They were relieved to see me. With respect to the verdict, I believe it is the word “allowed” that created a flutter. Experts pointed out that if the Supreme Court was “allowing” someone to visit the Valley, did it not lead one to conclude that one was “not allowed” to visit the Valley except when the court “allowed” one?

Anando Bhakto