Local papers cover Fayaz’s killing but shy away from taking a stand

NONE OF THE PAPERS CARRIED AN EDITORIAL OR AN OPINION PIECE CONDEMNING THE KILLING OF THE UNARMED OFFICER

Local Kashmiri newspapers on Thursday gave wide coverage to the abduction and killing of Lieutenant Ummer Fayaz, but stayed away from taking a stand on the murder.

None of the papers carried an editorial or an opinion piece condemning or questioning the killing of the unarmed young officer in Shopian while on a holiday. Fayaz’s body was found on Wednesday, a day after he was taken away at gunpoint from a wedding by suspected militants.

“Army officer abducted, killed in Shopian,” said the headline of leading English daily Greater Kashmir.

The paper carried the condemnation of the killing by national and local political leaders, alongside a report on the soldier’s grieving family.

It also carried a news agency report on how Fayaz’s first leave after having joined the army six months ago also became his last. Rising Kashmir, another leading daily, had pictures of Fayaz’s funeral and grieving relatives. The paper also carried a condemnation of the killing by various politicians.

The headline on Kashmir Reader’s first page said, “Young Kashmiri army officer’s bulletriddled body found in Shopian village’.

Major Urdu newspapers, like Srinagar Times, Daily Aftab and Kashmir Uzma also had frontpage reports.

While users from other parts of the country were unanimous in their criticism of the murder, responses inside Kashmir were mixed. While some criticised the killing, others called for an understanding of the context leading to violence and loss of lives in Kashmir.

“In conflicts condemnation is politics. If we actually care about those killed, we should ensure the context within which these killings are taking place is transformed. Belligerence hurts the self too,” wrote Srinagar-based rights activist Khurram Parvez on Facebook.

Journalist Wasim Khalid wrote on Facebook, “I do not think it was a right decision to kill an army officer, who was unarmed, and had come home to attend a marriage function. He was not a combatant. He was not fighting a war, neither he had done anything which was against the people’s cause. ”