Recent reports regarding the large-scale issuance of Gilgit-Baltistan domiciles to non-local individuals have triggered serious concern among the indigenous population of the region. Gilgit-Baltistan, a strategically significant and culturally distinct territory, has long remained sensitive to issues of identity, demographic balance, and political rights.
According to credible local sources, approximately 10,000 domiciles have reportedly been issued in recent years to individuals originating primarily from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and Afghanistan. Many residents view this development as an attempt to alter the region’s demographic composition—an issue that carries profound implications for land ownership, employment opportunities, political representation, and cultural preservation.
Illegal Numberdars and Irregular Domicile Issuance
Central to these concerns is the continued presence of illegal and unauthorized Numberdars—local revenue officials responsible for verifying residency and land records—in several districts of Gilgit-Baltistan. These officials play a decisive role in the domicile verification process, and their irregular appointments are widely believed to have facilitated the issuance of fraudulent or improperly vetted domiciles.
This situation persists despite a formal notification issued in 2020 by the Commissioner of Gilgit, commonly referred to as the “No More Numberdar” policy. The directive aimed to abolish the practice of appointing non-hereditary or unauthorized Numberdars, following repeated allegations of their involvement in fake domicile verifications, illegal land transfers, and manipulation of compensation and relief payments.
Although the notification remains officially in force, local sources indicate that illegal Numberdars continue to operate in certain districts. Their alleged role in facilitating domicile issuance to non-locals raises serious questions about administrative oversight, enforcement failures, and possible institutional complicity.
Public Reaction and Demands for Accountability
The revelations have sparked widespread public outrage. Community elders, civil society activists, and residents argue that unregulated domicile issuance directly undermines indigenous rights in a region with limited land, fragile ecosystems, and a complex political status. Historically, domicile regulations in Gilgit-Baltistan have been strictly controlled due to its disputed constitutional position and sensitive socio-economic landscape.
Public demands have intensified for immediate intervention by senior authorities, including the Commissioner of Gilgit and the Chief Secretary of Gilgit-Baltistan. Key demands include:
- A comprehensive and transparent investigation into violations of the “No More Numberdar” policy
- Immediate removal of all illegally appointed Numberdars
- Strict legal action against officials involved in issuing or facilitating fake or irregular domiciles
Local representatives warn that failure to take decisive action could irreparably damage public trust in state institutions and further entrench long-standing grievances related to governance and political exclusion.
Broader Implications for Gilgit-Baltistan
Gilgit-Baltistan continues to exist in a constitutional limbo—neither fully integrated as a province nor granted the rights enjoyed by other regions of Pakistan. In this context, concerns over demographic manipulation are not new. Similar apprehensions have surfaced in the past regarding land settlement policies, external migration, and control over natural resources.
The reported issuance of thousands of non-local domiciles has renewed these fears. If left unaddressed, it could accelerate demographic shifts, intensify competition over land and water, and undermine efforts to protect the region’s ethnic, linguistic, and sectarian diversity.
As public pressure mounts, the people of Gilgit-Baltistan are calling for swift, impartial, and transparent corrective measures. The response of administrative authorities in the coming months will be critical in determining whether these concerns are addressed responsibly—or whether they become another unresolved chapter in the region’s prolonged struggle for rights, representation, and self-determination.
