An intelligence report submitted to the government has alleged that the banned Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JKJAAC), which initially emerged over public concerns regarding electricity tariffs and flour prices in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), gradually evolved into a movement backed by foreign elements seeking to undermine Pakistan’s position on Kashmir and target state institutions.
According to the report, authorities have obtained what it describes as “credible evidence” indicating that hostile intelligence agencies and overseas networks, particularly in the United Kingdom and Europe, provided financial, organisational, and media support to the movement. The report claims the committee’s agenda shifted from socio-economic demands to political objectives, including challenges to AJK’s constitutional framework and calls for changes to electoral provisions.
The report states that the committee’s protests intensified during demonstrations held in 2024 and 2025, some of which turned violent. It says security personnel and civilians lost their lives during the unrest, while an agreement brokered by the federal government in October 2025 led to the implementation of several demands. However, it alleges that the committee later altered its demands instead of fully adhering to the agreement.
Authorities further claim that protests held abroad, including outside Pakistani diplomatic missions in London, Geneva, and near the European Parliament, formed part of a coordinated campaign to internationalise the issue. The report also alleges that social media networks, activists, and overseas groups amplified the committee’s narrative through organised online campaigns.
The intelligence report further claims that funds were channelled through informal transfer systems, including hawala and hundi networks, with financial assistance allegedly originating from individuals based in the UK and Europe. It also alleges that some individuals with militant backgrounds infiltrated protest gatherings.
Despite these allegations, the report acknowledges that many citizens initially joined the movement to protest genuine economic hardships rather than support any subsequent political agenda. It recommends addressing legitimate public grievances through dialogue while taking legal action against violence, foreign-funded activities, and any alleged collaboration with hostile networks.