Latest News
Back
Case Of Kulbhushanjadhav: Pakistan Breached The Vienna Convention And ICJ Rules
Between 18 and 21 February this year, a public hearing was held at the ICJ. The team of lawyers representing India was led by Senior Counsel Harish Salve. The Pakistani legal team was headed by Khawar Qureshi.
A military court in Pakistan condemned KulbhushanJadhav, an Indian national, to death for spying and terrorism. In May 2017, India invoked its authority to grant interim actions pursuant to Article74 of the Rules of the Court.
Jadhav is detained rather than imprisoned in a Rawalpindi inter-service intelligence unit, although he awaits execution.
Pakistan was considered to have violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) and the International Court of Justice has ruled that India has no access to KulbhushanJadhav by a consular body.In accordance with Article I of the Optional Protocol of 24 April 1963 on the compulsory settlement of disputes, the Court held it to be competent to comply with the Republic of India's application.
The Court ultimately stated that ongoing execution stay is an indispensable condition for efficient evaluation and reconsideration of KulbhushanJadhav's conviction and sentence.
ICJ President Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf gave the verdict yesterday at the Peace Palace in The Hague.The verdict rendered was one with 15 judges, one dissident. The dissident judge, Pakistan's Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, was named ad hoc judge, and India's Dalveer Bhandari, a member of the Bench.
In the case KulbhushanJadhav, ICJ granted India's application for interim action. Indeed, the execution of Jadhav had been held until the court had decided on merits.India has accused Pakistan of breach of Article 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, whereby Jadhav had failed until long after his arrest to inform him of his imprisonment.
In its letter to the ICJ, India states that Jadhav was abduccted from Iran and was then detained in Baluchistan on March 3, 2016, when he had retired from the Indian Navy. Only on 25 March was India notified about its detention. India has also indicated that Pakistan has refused repeated efforts to grant consular access to Jadhav.
India, by manner of relief, had requested a suspension of the military court's death sentence and sought an order that would prevent Pakistan from exercising that sentence. The Commission also requested provisional relief from the ICJ by declaring a sentence violating Article 36 of the Vienna Convention and Article 14 of the ICCPR, seeking Jadhav's release.
Summing up, Pakistan was accused by India of:
- No notice of the arrest of Jadhav in India,
- Not to inform Jadhav, pursuant to the Convention, of his rights ;
- Lowering consular agents from India's access to Jadhav.
India asked the International Court of Justice to:
- Declare that the Vienna Convention is infringed by the military court,
- Direct the release of Jadhav by Pakistan and enable secure transit for India,
- Direct Pakistan to take measures to annul the Military Court's judgment,
- Direct a trial before civilian courts under ordinary law.
