Agha Ruhullah Mehdi and the Politics of Dissent in Jammu and Kashmir

The idea of a “forgotten promise” runs through much of Jammu and Kashmir’s contemporary political discourse. For years, political communication from the region has relied heavily on ambiguity, saying enough to remain relevant in New Delhi, yet rarely enough to fully articulate public sentiment in Srinagar. Since 2019, this gap has widened further, leaving a significant section of the Valley’s youth politically disengaged and unsure of where they belong.

It is within this context that Agha Syed Ruhullah Mehdi, the Member of Parliament from Srinagar, has emerged as a figure who draws attention less for political positioning and more for the manner in which he articulates the politics of Dissent in Jammu and Kashmir.

Whether one agrees with him or not, Ruhullah represents a departure from the cautious, calibrated language that has come to dominate mainstream politics in the region. His appeal appears to lie not in political novelty but in the consistency with which he foregrounds constitutional questions and public accountability.

Dissent Within the Constitutional Framework

Ruhullah’s interventions in the 18th Lok Sabha have largely avoided populist rhetoric. Instead, he has framed his arguments through constitutional reasoning, particularly on issues where nationalism and religious identity are often conflated. During the late 2025 parliamentary discussions surrounding the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram, he argued that refusal to sing certain verses cannot be interpreted as a lack of patriotism, as freedom of faith is explicitly protected by the Constitution.

By doing so, he shifted the debate from emotional assertions of loyalty to a legal and ethical examination of pluralism. His point that allegiance to the nation cannot be measured by the dilution of religious belief resonated beyond Kashmir and found space within broader civil society conversations. Rather than projecting himself as a symbol, Ruhullah positioned the Constitution itself as the central reference point, reminding Parliament that Indian nationalism has historically accommodated diversity rather than enforced uniformity.

Choosing the Street Over the Secretariat

The limits of political integrity are often tested when dissent clashes with one’s own party in power. For Ruhullah, this tension became visible during the Reservation Policy controversy and the student protests that shaped political debate in 2024 and 2025. While the National Conference held power, he publicly aligned himself with protesting students, describing his position, drawing from Malcolm X, as that of a “field” representative rather than a “house” functionary.

This choice was not without consequences. His decision to stay away from campaigning during the Budgam by-election was read by party leadership as indiscipline, but among sections of the public it was interpreted as a statement against performative politics. By insisting that he would rather stand alone than remain silent within government, Ruhullah reinforced the idea that an electoral mandate entails obligation, not merely authority. For many young voters, this posture marked a rare instance of a legislator placing political risk above party comfort.

Memory, Accountability, and Political Language

Ruhullah’s political vocabulary consistently returns to memory and accountability. The phrase he frequently invokes, “The axe forgets, but the tree remembers,” captures his insistence that collective trauma cannot be erased through administrative normalisation alone. Unlike leaders who urge the population to move on, he has repeatedly demanded institutional acknowledgement of past injustices.

In Parliament and public forums, he has raised concerns about prolonged detentions, citing cases such as Khurram Parvez and Irfan Meraj, and questioned disparities in bail granted to convicted criminals versus activists. His parliamentary query asking whether India is adopting anti-Muslim policies inspired by Israel drew criticism for its sharpness but also forced uncomfortable conversations about civil liberties and state power. Such interventions have positioned him less as a conciliator and more as a persistent interrogator of the system.

Friction Within the Party

Ruhullah’s relationship with his own party leadership further illustrates his political positioning. In October 2025, he openly criticised the National Conference for prioritising statehood over the restoration of Article 370, arguing that such a shift diluted the mandate on which the party had sought public support. His disagreements with the Chief Minister over issues such as demolition drives following the Pahalgam attack and questions of transparency in cross-voting highlighted a refusal to subordinate personal conviction to party consensus.

When accused of disloyalty, Ruhullah responded by asserting that his allegiance lay with the mandate given by the people rather than party hierarchy. This stance has found traction particularly among younger voters, many of whom remain sceptical of entrenched political lineages and closed decision-making structures.

Conflict, Peace, and Political Responsibility

Beyond domestic dissent, Ruhullah has also articulated a consistent position on conflict and militarisation. During debates on border tensions and Operation Sindoor, he emphasised both the safety of soldiers and the protection of civilian life, arguing that war offers no durable solution. His call for dialogue with neighbouring countries such as Pakistan and China framed diplomacy not as concession but as a political necessity.

In a region where security discourse often overrides humanitarian concerns, this emphasis on dialogue reflects a political imagination that treats human life as central rather than incidental.

Agha Ruhullah Mehdi does not fit neatly into conventional leadership archetypes. He neither claims infallibility nor avoids confrontation. What distinguishes him is not unanimity of support but the clarity of his positions and his willingness to articulate them even when politically inconvenient.

In a political climate marked by caution and calibrated silence, Ruhullah represents a form of engagement that prioritises principle over presentation. Whether this approach translates into long-term political transformation remains uncertain. What is evident, however, is that he has reopened space for a more direct conversation about representation, dignity, and constitutional rights in Jammu and Kashmir, a space that many had begun to believe was closing. ( Shahid Nazir is an independent writer and researcher focusing on political, public policy, and social issues, with a particular interest in Kashmir-related affairs.)