The effects of these rules include:

●    Indigenous people of IAJK no longer automatically qualify for public employment or education opportunities in IAJK.  Traditionally, “state subject” (i.e., of the historic state of J&K) or “permanent resident” status (a previous Government of India modification of “state subject” status), both of which are now replaced with the new “domicile” rules, entitled indigenous residents of IAJK rights to public employment, education, ownership of immovable property and other important rights.  It is anticipated that the implications of the new status will be similarly broad and less accessible to the indigenous residents of IAJK. 

●    Indigenous people of IAJK, or holders of the previous “state subject” or “permanent resident” status, are not automatically grandfathered under the new domicile rules.  They must apply for status like any non-local resident of India.  Their applications are subject to rejection.  It is believed that many indigenous people of IAJK do not possess the certificate required to obtain the new domicile status.

●       The new domicile status is available to any Indian (subject to certain qualifying criteria) and their children (in some cases, even if they never reside in J&K).  There is a special qualification category for the children of Government of India officials and military personnel who have served in IAJK for ten years, i.e., the families of those officials most directly responsible for the human rights violations and acts constituting war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in IAJK.  

●       The documentary requirements for non-locals to obtain domicile status are minimal and easily obtained.

●       The new domicile status is not available to any “state subjects” or “permanent residents” or their progeny who are not Indian citizens.  All refugees or exiles from IAJK including those in Pakistan-Administered J&K, who are predominantly if not entirely IAJK Muslims, are rendered ineligible. This is in stark contrast to Hindu refugees from “West Pakistan” who are granted domicile rights.  All diaspora Kashmiris and their children who are not Indian citizens are rendered ineligible.

●       Local authorities have strong incentives to not resist a mandate from GoI officials regarding the greenlighting of Indian citizens for the new status.  Specifically, the rules provide for a Rs.50,000 fine (per instance; this amount represents a substantial portion of the monthly earnings of most local authorities) for local authorities who do not comply within 7 business days with an appellate authority’s (who are GoI bureaucrats) decision to grant a domicile certificate.

●       The procedures fast-track decisions and stipulate that they are to be made within 15 business days (with only a 15-business day appeal period).  The procedures are designed to rush decisions and prevent deliberation and scrutiny.

●       There are no meaningful procedural safeguards.  Primary decisionmaking authority resides with low-level local authorities who are notoriously subject to influence and were previously considered unqualified to make grave decisions of this type.  Appeals are heard by Government of India bureaucrats, functionaries for the Government of India executive.  There is not even the semblance of due process afforded the people of IAJK with respect to important legacy rights that are fundamental to their continued welfare and existence.

●       The rules are being interpreted retrospectively, immediately qualifying an untold number of Indians according to the criteria for the new domicile status.

The significance of these rules includes the following:

●       These rules further incentivize (through access to employment and education) demographic flooding as well as service of Government of India in the repression of the people of IAJK.  

●       The state is the most prevalent employer in IAJK and the primary employer of people who have obtained higher education.  Sociologically, state employment is essential for economic stability, particularly for urban and more educated people in IAJK.  The new rules will increase the levels of unemployment in IAJK and diminish future employment prospects and increase unemployment.  There were reportedly over 250,000 highly educated and unemployed youth in IAJK prior to the successive lockdowns and planned economic destruction of IAJK in the period beginning in August 2019.

●       The rules’ impairment of the opportunity to obtain education is a further attack on the broad assault on IAJK residents’ access to education due to, among things, long-term closure of schools, denial of access to internet connectivity and restrictions on movement or travel.  

●       The popular pro-democracy movement in J&K began in the early 20th century and continues to this day.  The major demands of that rights struggle were: equal access to education, an end to economically exploitative practices, equal access to state employment and the right to self-determination.  The Government of India is making the exercise of the right to self-determination, a goal that was never achieved, a de facto impossibility through changes to the demography of IAJK.  The Government of India has reversed or is reversing all of the accomplishments won by that movement (including re-distribution of land to landless farmers, improved access to education and improved access to state employment) through multigenerational civil struggle in the face of intense repression and extravagant state violence.