Research and Writing: Khwaja Kabir Ahmed
For Pakistan, the EU’s GSP Plus (Generalized System of Preferences) is not just a trade facility but an important system linked to international obligations related to human rights, labour rights, environmental protection, good governance and fundamental freedoms. Pakistan has been benefiting from GSP Plus since January 1, 2014 and the facility is of exceptional economic importance for Pakistani exports, especially textiles and garments, in the European market. According to the EU, ratification of relevant international conventions and their effective implementation are also a basic requirement for benefiting under this system.
Now a very important point has come to light in this matter. The EU Ambassador to Pakistan, Raimondas Carvalhos, has clarified in a recent interview that the continuation of GSP Plus for Pakistan in 2029 is not certain or guaranteed. According to him, a decision on the future is expected in the first half of 2029 and the status of Pakistan’s implementation of relevant UN human rights treaties will play a significant role in this decision. According to him, Pakistan has time for reforms, but mere ratification of laws or treaties is not enough; practical steps and clear political commitment are needed.
This statement carries a clear message for Pakistan. The question is no longer how many international treaties Pakistan has ratified, but rather to what extent the rights guaranteed under these treaties are actually enjoyed by the people living within Pakistan.
Here, a fundamental constitutional, political and international distinction must be made, because it would not be correct to place human rights within Pakistan and the situation in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir in the same constitutional category. The four provinces of Pakistan—Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan—are part of the constitutional state of Pakistan and the people living in them are citizens of Pakistan. The protection of the fundamental human rights of these citizens is a constitutional obligation of Pakistan as well as under the international human rights treaties that Pakistan has ratified. Therefore, any issue related to enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, political participation, peaceful assembly, fair trial or minority rights in these provinces is seen in the context of Pakistan’s fundamental rights to its own citizens and Pakistan’s international obligations.
In contrast, the status of Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir is fundamentally different. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is an internationally disputed state on the UN agenda, whose final political status has not yet been determined. Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir is not a constitutional province of Pakistan but a region over which Pakistan exercises administrative authority. This difference makes Pakistan’s responsibility, not less, but more sensitive in many respects, because here Pakistan faces accountability not only on the basis of its state relationship with its constitutional citizens but also as a state with effective administrative authority in a disputed region, in terms of international human rights standards and its international commitments. Therefore, the protection of the life, liberty, dignity, expression, peaceful assembly, political participation, fair trial and other fundamental human rights of the inhabitants of Jammu and Kashmir is not only an internal political issue but also assumes importance in the context of international human rights monitoring.
This aspect is also important because a large part of the people of Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir live outside the region, especially in the UK and Europe. According to various estimates available, a large Kashmiri population from this region lives abroad, and a significant part of it lives in the UK and Europe. If the situation in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir deteriorates with regard to political rights, freedom of expression, peaceful protest or other fundamental human rights, the voice of the inhabitants there is not limited to the local level; Kashmiris living abroad also raise their voices in democratic societies, conveying their complaints and demands to their representatives, parliaments, human rights organizations and European institutions. Thus, the human rights situation in the disputed state under Pakistani administration could bring additional international attention and diplomatic and human rights pressure to Pakistan.
Therefore, it is important for Pakistan to understand that protecting the fundamental rights of its citizens in all four provinces of Pakistan is a fundamental constitutional and state responsibility, but the issue of people’s rights in the disputed Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan administration is even more sensitive due to the unique international status of the region. Any credible information about the use of force, political dissent, peaceful protests, arrests or alleged human rights violations there is not only discussed internally but can also reach the Kashmiri community abroad, human rights organizations, European parliaments, civil society and other international institutions. This is why the better path for Pakistan is to ensure the protection of the fundamental rights of the people there not out of fear of any external pressure but under the requirements of its own responsibility, the rule of law and its administrative role in a disputed region.
This distinction is also important in the context of GSP Plus. The European Union monitors a country’s international obligations by assessing its overall human rights situation. The question of effective implementation of the international conventions ratified by Pakistan is related to Pakistan’s overall obligations. Therefore, the human rights situation in areas where Pakistan exercises effective administrative authority is important, as well as human rights violations in its own constitutional areas.
Another fundamental principle cannot be ignored here in the case of Kashmir. Even declaring Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir as a formal province of Pakistan does not eliminate the disputed status of the region. Similarly, describing the people of the region only as ordinary citizens of Pakistan also ignores their specific political and constitutional status. The protection of the fundamental human rights of the inhabitants there is in its place, while the question of the ultimate political status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir remains in its place.
This distinction becomes even more important when it comes to incidents of political protest, public movement, freedom of expression, freedom of the press or the use of state power in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir. If peaceful citizens protest for their political, constitutional or economic rights, the fundamental duty of the state should be to listen to their demands, negotiate and, if there is an allegation of violation of any law, to have it decided through a transparent legal process.
If any incident involves allegations of use of force by Pakistani forces, arrest, detention, alleged enforced disappearance, extrajudicial killing or obstruction of journalists from their work, these should be investigated independently, transparently and in a credible manner. Rather than dismissing any allegation as final, it is essential to arrive at the truth based on credible evidence, eyewitnesses, medical records, photographs and videos, court documents and independent human rights investigations.
This is where the issue of the EU’s GSP Plus for Pakistan comes into play with Kashmir. It would not be correct to say that Pakistan’s GSP Plus will automatically end as a result of a single incident. The GSP Plus process is much more complex than that. But it is also not true that credible and consistent reports on human rights in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir or any part of Pakistan will remain completely outside the global monitoring process.
The European Union assesses Pakistan’s performance under GSP+ on the basis of information received from various sources, which may include relevant UN monitoring bodies, European institutions, civil society and other credible sources. Therefore, the real need for Pakistan is to establish effective reform mechanisms within itself, rather than just responding to external criticism regarding human rights.
An important development has now emerged in this monitoring process. The European Commission, in its GSP+ review for Pakistan for 2023-2025 on 16 July 2026, said that serious and systemic challenges persist in the implementation of human rights in several areas and that there have been setbacks in some areas, in particular with regard to enforced disappearances, minority rights, freedom of the press, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. In the same review, the Commission also clarified that the future monitoring of GSP+ is not limited to the mere ratification of the agreements but focuses on their effective practical implementation. Subsequently, on 31 August 2026, the EU Ambassador to Pakistan, Raimondos Carvalhos, also clarified that the continuation of GSP+ for Pakistan after 2029 is not “certain or guaranteed” and the decision will be based on Pakistan’s practical implementation of the UN conventions. This makes it clear that Pakistan is not facing an immediate GSP+ termination at this time, but its human rights record is under regular and serious monitoring for the 2029 decision.
The EU ambassador’s mention of issues such as enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, freedom of expression, journalists’ rights and minority rights should be seen in this broader context. These issues should not be resolved simply to avoid external pressure but because the real strength of a state comes from the trust of its citizens.
Pakistan must also understand that its diplomatic importance has its place in world politics. If Pakistan plays a role in mediating between the US and Iran or makes diplomatic efforts to resolve Gaza and other global conflicts, it is certainly important. But the diplomatic importance of any country does not exempt it from international human rights obligations. The same basic principle applies to GSP Plus that political importance and human rights standards are kept separate.
Pakistan still has time. The decision of 2029 will not happen today, but the steps that Pakistan will take by 2029 can form the basis for that decision. Therefore, the real question is not what will happen in 2029; the real question is what Pakistan will do by 2029.
If Pakistan starts serious reforms in its four provinces today to protect the fundamental rights of citizens, end enforced disappearances, conduct independent investigations into allegations of extrajudicial killings, ensure freedom of the press, freedom of expression and effective protection of political participation, the benefits will not be limited to GSP Plus. It will also strengthen the rule of law, democratic institutions and public trust within Pakistan.
Similarly, in the disputed Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan administration, it is necessary to prioritize political dialogue, negotiations and constitutional and political processes instead of the use of force. Recognizing the specific disputed status of the inhabitants there, their fundamental human rights, political freedoms and the right to peaceful assembly must be respected. There may be disagreement with any political demand, but treating peaceful disagreement as a crime or hostility is not the solution to the problem.
Pakistan should also remember that human rights are not only the rights of those with whom the government agrees. The real test of human rights is where citizens disagree with the policies of the state. The strength of a democratic state is not measured by how quickly it silences dissent, but by how patiently, legally and fairly it listens to dissent.
The Pakistani people, political parties, lawyers, journalists, intellectuals and civil society should not see the issue of human rights as a campaign against Pakistan. Whether it is the rights of citizens living in Pakistan’s four provinces or the basic human rights of the residents of the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan’s administration, the demand for their protection is actually a demand for building a society where the relationship between the state and the people is based on law and trust rather than force.
The Pakistani government should not wait for 2029. Effective reforms should be initiated today, not out of fear of any decision by the European Union, but to respect the rights of its people. The fundamental rights of its citizens should be guaranteed in all four provinces of Pakistan, and the fundamental human rights, political freedoms and the right to peaceful protest should be protected in the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan’s administration, taking into account its specific political and constitutional status.
Every allegation should be investigated independently, every citizen should get justice according to the law, journalists should be allowed to work freely, peaceful political differences should be resolved through dialogue, not force, and state institutions should be held accountable within the framework of the law and the constitution.
Pakistan has a choice to wait until 2029 and face an international verdict, or to reform today and show the world that Pakistan considers human rights not as an external condition but as its state responsibility.
The people of Pakistan also have a responsibility to raise their voice for the fundamental rights of every citizen of their country and at the same time demand that the human and political rights of the peaceful residents of the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan’s administration be respected and protected. Tell the government to resolve differences through dialogue, not force; Instead of covering up allegations, independent investigations should be conducted; and human rights should be recognized on the basis of justice, law, and humanity, not because of international pressure.
Because a strong Pakistan is not one that its citizens fear; a strong Pakistan is one that its citizens trust.
٭٭٭
Share this content:
