Omar Abdullah interacts with supporters at a rally in Srinagar on Monday. (PTI)

Srinagar, Nov. 24: Plain-speaking, Omar Abdullah says, happens to be one of his “characteristics” even if it sometimes causes trouble.

As he faces the toughest political battle of his life, the chief minister seems inclined to do a little more of it.

Omar’s penchant for calling a spade a spade was witnessed even during the first year of his rule in 2009. The discovery of two women’s bodies in Shopian had triggered massive protests amid allegations of rape and murder against the security forces.

Omar, however, said that preliminary investigations had indicated drowning, provoking public fury. The CBI later confirmed that the women had indeed drowned and that no rape had taken place, but that conclusion still has few takers in Kashmir.

Nearly six years on, Omar still sticks to his position. He says that Shopian was “unfortunately” a problem of perception and asks how the CBI’s findings, while being held up as the “symbol of truth in (the) Pathribal matter”, are discounted in the Shopian case.

“The same organisation cannot be right in Pathribal (in which the CBI accused soldiers of killing five civilians in a fake encounter) and wrong in Shopian,” Omar told The Telegraph in an interview.

“The CBI report is in front of me. There was no evidence of rape, no evidence of rape whatsoever. The samples that were found were created by the CMO (chief medical officer), a lady doctor, using her own samples and (claiming) those as evidence. Unfortunately, in the first few days this matter was mishandled,” he said.

According to the CBI, the doctor and other medical staff had fudged evidence to suggest that the Shopian sisters-in-law, Asiya and Neelofar, were raped.

Ask whether he believed that they had drowned and not been raped, Omar said his “personal views in this case are of no consequence”.

“The fact is, the evidence points us in a particular direction… unless somebody can show me evidence to the contrary. The CBI has given evidence.”

Army powers

Omar’s relations with the army have been less than cordial, with the defence establishment resisting his efforts to get the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act withdrawn from Kashmir. The act gives the security forces a high degree of immunity from prosecution.

“I think it is no secret that the ministry of defence, particularly the army, has been dead against the (act’s) withdrawal,” Omar said.

He appeared peeved that “doubting people” (an apparent reference to the army) used bizarre arguments to counter him, but hoped the act would eventually go.

“We have given Jammu and Kashmir its most peaceful years in 25 years. On the ground, militancy incidents are dramatically lower than they were even five or six years before,” he said.

“Every year, people say this is going to be a bad year (to justify the act’s continued enforcement in the Valley). Every year, the doubting people say there will be destruction this year,” he said.

“They start with, ‘Because 2010 was a bad year, 2011 has to be a bad year’. It hasn’t been a bad year. Then they say, ‘Because of the withdrawal of the US forces and international forces from Afghanistan, militancy has to increase in Jammu and Kashmir.’ It hasn’t.”

Omar cited how some lobbies had justified the act’s continuance in Kashmir this year on the ground that there would be two elections (for the Lok Sabha and the Assembly) in the state.

“What happened? You still have a more peaceful year than last year. Every year, they find new reasons not to proceed on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act,” he said.

“Now, because justice has been done in the Machil case, they are using Machil as an excuse. They are saying, ‘Because we are doing justice in the Machil matter, we have proved (the act) is not a hindrance.’ How is that true?”

An army court martial recently handed life sentences to a colonel and five soldiers in the Machil fake encounter case of 2010, in which three civilians were killed and branded militants.

Congress ties

The alliance between Omar’s National Conference and the Congress had stayed afloat for a long time despite series differences cropping up repeatedly.

But the drubbing in this year’s general election, in which the alliance lost all the six seats in the state, led to a break-up. The Congress has since launched a frontal attack on Omar, blaming him for many of the coalition’s failures.

The chief minister said the Congress’s finding fault with him was in “extremely bad taste”.

He cited how, just six months ago, the Congress had been happy with him when he was seeking “votes for Rahul Gandhi” and campaigning for Congress candidates Ghulam Nabi Azad and Madan Lal Sharma in Jammu.

Omar said he had received the utmost support and cooperation from Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Manmohan Singh in the past six years but the Congress kept creating difficulties at the ground level from time to time.

He said that during the first three years of his government, there had been noises about a rotational chief ministership between the National Conference and the Congress for three years each. When that matter was settled, efforts at destabilisation were made repeatedly.

BJP surge

Omar said he expected the BJP to do much better than before but not to form the government.

“Definitely not on their own, but I don’t know what will happen in terms of the post-poll scenario,” he said.

The BJP’s highest tally in the state, which has 87 Assembly seats, has been 11. It came in the previous election in 2008.

Will his party be ready to join hands with the BJP to thwart the People’s Democratic Party, its bitter rival and the perceived favourite this election?

Omar said the BJP differed on core issues from his party, which stands for strengthening Article 370, a distinct identity for the state, a separate Constitution and a separate flag. The BJP, he said, was against all these demands.

“I’m not for opportunistic politics — for six years of government by dismantling everything (the National Conference has stood for),” Omar said.

“Unless they (the BJP) are willing to surrender (their stand on) these issues permanently, I don’t see how we can come together.”