Every year on October 24, official buildings across Pakistan-administered Kashmir hoist flags, hold seminars, and issue government statements marking what is known as “Kashmir’s Independence Day.”
Yet beyond those offices, most ordinary Kashmiris go about their daily lives often uncertain about what truly happened on this day in 1947, and whether “Azad” (free) Kashmir is genuinely free.
Seventy-eight years later, the events of October 24, 1947, remain central to the story of a land divided by borders, politics, and promises—its destiny rewritten through hurried decisions, tribal uprisings, and unfinished pledges of self-determination.
Before partition, Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state under Maharaja Hari Singh, a Dogra ruler presiding over a Muslim-majority population. Under the terms of the Indian Independence Act of 1947, princely states were given the choice to join India or Pakistan, or to remain independent.
Hari Singh initially chose independence, signing Standstill Agreements with both newly born dominions to maintain postal, transport, and trade links while he decided the state’s future. Pakistan accepted the agreement immediately, but India requested further discussion, leaving the status of Kashmir in a delicate balance.
By late October 1947, that balance collapsed. Armed tribal fighters from Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) entered Kashmir, calling their movement a “liberation campaign” to free fellow Muslims from Dogra rule.
As the tribesmen advanced toward Srinagar, chaos spread across the Valley. Facing a collapsing administration, the Maharaja appealed to India for military support. In return, New Delhi demanded he sign the Instrument of Accession, formally aligning Jammu and Kashmir with India. He signed on October 26, 1947—a decision that sparked the first war between India and Pakistan.
At the time, Gilgit-Baltistan was also part of the princely state. In early November 1947, local Gilgit Scouts revolted against the Maharaja’s forces and declared allegiance to Pakistan. While the region is today administered separately, it remains part of the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir under United Nations resolutions, linking its fate to the same unfinished question born out of that turbulent October.
October 24, 1947 — The Proclamation of “Azad Kashmir”
Two days before the Maharaja’s accession to India, leaders from western parts of the state — particularly from Muzaffarabad, Rawalakot, and Mirpur — declared the formation of a “Provisional Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.”
The declaration, known historically as the Proclamation of Freedom (Elan-e-Azadi), was made on October 24, 1947, in what is now the Muzaffarabad district.
The founders, including Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan (later known as the first President of Azad Kashmir), claimed to represent the will of the people who had risen against the Dogra regime. Their statement announced the establishment of a temporary government that would continue “the struggle for the complete liberation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.”
In essence, October 24 marks the day when Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) declared itself a separate administrative entity — not as a sovereign nation, but as a self-governing region aligned with Pakistan in its quest to free all of Kashmir.
The Partition of Kashmir — Three Administrations, One Disputed Land
Today, the historic princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is divided into three main parts, each administered by a different country:
- Pakistan-administered territories:
- Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) — roughly 13,000 square kilometers with Muzaffarabad as its capital.
- Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) — around 72,000 square kilometers, bordering China’s Xinjiang region.
- Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh:
- Comprising about 101,000 square kilometers, this area includes the Kashmir Valley, Jammu, and Ladakh.
- China-controlled territories:
- Aksai Chin, seized during the 1962 Sino-Indian War, and Shaksgam Valley, ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963.
Thus, the original princely state — once unified under the Dogra dynasty — remains divided among Pakistan, India, and China. Each holds its own narrative and political terminology to describe their respective zones.
Is Azad Kashmir Truly “Azad”?
The word “Azad” means “free,” but the political reality of Pakistan-administered Kashmir has long been debated.
Azad Jammu and Kashmir has its own President, Prime Minister, legislative assembly, and flag, but its powers are largely limited.
Under the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution of 1974, the region’s governance is closely linked to Islamabad. Article 31 of that constitution explicitly states that the Government of AJK must align with Pakistan’s Ministry of Kashmir Affairs, especially on matters related to defense, security, foreign affairs, and currency.
Critics — both inside and outside the region — argue that this system offers only “symbolic autonomy.”
Supporters, however, contend that the arrangement provides stability and representation while maintaining Pakistan’s position that Kashmir’s final status must be decided through a United Nations-supervised plebiscite.
The UN Resolution and the “Unfinished Promise”
Following the first war between India and Pakistan (1947–48), the United Nations intervened. The UN Security Council Resolution 47, passed on April 21, 1948, called for:
- A ceasefire between Indian and Pakistani forces,
- Withdrawal of troops from the region, and
- A free and impartial plebiscite allowing Kashmiris to decide their future.
The ceasefire took effect on January 1, 1949, creating what is now known as the Line of Control (LoC) the de facto border dividing Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered parts of Kashmir.
However, the promised plebiscite has never been held. Both countries blame each other for failing to create the conditions necessary for such a vote.
Changing Realities: From “Azad” to “Administered”
Over the decades, Pakistan’s official terminology for the region evolved from “Azad Kashmir” to “Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir” in international contexts — a phrase also used by the United Nations, BBC, and Al Jazeera to maintain neutrality.
This linguistic shift reflects a broader debate: is AJK a self-governing liberated zone, or a semi-autonomous administrative territory under Pakistan’s federal structure?
Many scholars argue that the governance model of AJK allows limited local participation but leaves critical decisions to Pakistan’s central government. The AJK assembly, for instance, cannot legislate on matters of defense, foreign affairs, or currency — all handled directly by Islamabad.
At the same time, AJK has its own judicial system, civil service, and electoral process — distinguishing it from the status of a province.
Public Awareness and Commemoration
Despite its political importance, October 24 rarely generates the kind of public enthusiasm seen on national days in other regions.
In Muzaffarabad and other cities, the government organizes official ceremonies — flag hoisting, speeches, and cultural performances — but many ordinary citizens remain unaware of what the date signifies.
In cafes, drawing rooms, and online discussions, one often hears the same question:
“What actually happened on October 24?”
This disconnect between state-sponsored commemoration and public awareness reveals a broader identity struggle within Pakistan-administered Kashmir — between historical memory and political present, between symbolic freedom and practical constraints.
Kashmir Today: A Region Split Three Ways
The conflict’s territorial divisions remain stark:
| Region | Administered by | Area (approx.) | Capital | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azad Jammu and Kashmir | Pakistan | 13,000 km² | Muzaffarabad | Self-governing territory under Pakistan’s Ministry of Kashmir Affairs |
| Gilgit-Baltistan | Pakistan | 72,000 km² | Gilgit | De facto province; separate governance order |
| Jammu & Kashmir + Ladakh | India | 101,000 km² | Srinagar / Leh | Union Territories under Indian Constitution (since Aug 2019) |
| Aksai Chin / Shaksgam | China | ~38,000 km² | N/A | Under Chinese control (disputed) |
Voices of the Present: Between Aspiration and Reality
In conversations across Muzaffarabad, Rawalakot, and Kotli, people express a range of opinions about “Azadi.”
For some, October 24 symbolizes a proud moment when their ancestors stood up against Dogra rule and declared independence before India’s occupation.
For others, it represents an unfinished revolution — one that brought only partial self-rule under Pakistan’s shadow.
“We commemorate our Independence Day every year, but our destiny is still tied to decisions made in Islamabad and Delhi,” says a university lecturer in Muzaffarabad.
“Until Kashmiris on both sides of the LoC can decide their future freely, our independence remains incomplete.”
India’s Perspective
India maintains that the entire territory of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir legally acceded to India through the Maharaja’s signature on the Instrument of Accession in 1947.
From Delhi’s standpoint, Pakistan’s control over AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan is “illegal occupation.”
Following India’s revocation of Article 370 in August 2019 — which removed the semi-autonomous status of Jammu and Kashmir — New Delhi has integrated its portion directly under central rule, claiming it as an internal matter.
This move, however, reignited tensions across the Line of Control and drew criticism from international human rights organizations.
Pakistan’s Position
Pakistan continues to describe Azad Jammu and Kashmir as a “self-governing state under the control of its own people” and emphasizes its commitment to the UN-mandated plebiscite.
Islamabad argues that its role is administrative rather than annexational — a caretaker arrangement until the final settlement of the Kashmir dispute.
Nevertheless, constitutional and budgetary control remains heavily centralized. Pakistan’s Ministry of Kashmir Affairs directly oversees AJK’s major development programs, media policies, and foreign engagement.
China’s Role
China controls the Aksai Chin plateau — a region India claims as part of Ladakh — and has significant strategic and economic interests in Gilgit-Baltistan, especially through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
Beijing’s presence adds another layer of complexity to the dispute, transforming what began as a local territorial conflict into a multi-state geopolitical puzzle.
The Continuing Debate
Seventy-eight years after the declaration of October 24, the questions that defined Azad Kashmir’s creation still persist:
- Is Azad Kashmir free in name or in essence?
- Has the region achieved the “complete liberation” envisioned by its founders?
- And what does freedom mean in a land where sovereignty remains contested?
For many Kashmiris, these are not just political queries — they are questions of identity, dignity, and future.
October 24, 1947 was the day a group of Kashmiri leaders stood up and claimed agency over their destiny, forming what they called a provisional government of the liberated territory.
It marked the first organized political act of resistance from within the state itself — an attempt to assert the will of Kashmiris at a time when global powers and new nations were redrawing borders.
Today, as the people of Azad Jammu and Kashmir quietly mark another year of that declaration, the spirit of that day survives — not in parades or official speeches, but in the enduring hope for a peaceful, united, and self-determined Kashmir.
