For the best experience, open
https://m.greaterkashmir.com
on your mobile browser.
Advertisement

Yasin Malik’s affidavit about sanctity of dialogue: Sajad Lone

He said that the document presents a first-person account of a Kashmiri who carries hundreds of cases, has been convicted for life, and faces the prospect of the death penalty
11:27 PM Sep 27, 2025 IST | GK NEWS SERVICE
He said that the document presents a first-person account of a Kashmiri who carries hundreds of cases, has been convicted for life, and faces the prospect of the death penalty
yasin malik’s affidavit about sanctity of dialogue  sajad lone
Yasin Malik’s affidavit about sanctity of dialogue: Sajad Lone___File photo

Srinagar, Sep 27: Peoples Conference President and MLA Handwara Sajad Lone on Saturday offered a detailed reading of the 85-page affidavit submitted by Yasin Malik, stressing that its significance goes far beyond the individual or questions of clemency.

Advertisement

“This affidavit is not about Yasin Malik as a person, nor is it about seeking clemency,” Lone said. “It is fundamentally about the sanctity of the institution of dialogue and the threats it faces in resolving conflicts in this region,” Lone said as per KNS.

He said that the document presents a first-person account of a Kashmiri who carries hundreds of cases, has been convicted for life, and faces the prospect of the death penalty.

Advertisement

“It is based on real-life events,” Lone emphasized, “but it is more than a legal affidavit. It is, in essence, an academic analysis of the power—or powerlessness—of dialogue to resolve conflicts. It symbolises the relevance—or irrelevance—of dialogue, especially in the context of Kashmir.” Lone highlighted the affidavit’s central themes: truthfulness, trust, the politics of promises and the consequences of reneging on them. He noted that while these variables are often invisible and sidelined, they are crucial if dialogue is to retain credibility and deliver meaningful outcomes.

Advertisement

Malik’s engagement with Delhi, he explained, was understood by him as a semi-formal dialogue process. Retrospectively, Malik feels that Delhi used dialogue as a tool of statecraft rather than genuine conflict resolution. He also pointed out a critical dimension of the affidavit: the pattern of engagement and reneging on promises is consistent across party lines and bureaucratic institutions. On the use of dialogue as a tool of deception, he noted, “All political parties and bureaucratic institutions appear to perfectly overlap.”

Advertisement

He emphasized that the responsibility now lies with Delhi. “The state must either deny the claims, acknowledge that engagement with Malik was insincere, or take decisions in the spirit of dialogue and commitments made.”

Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement