New Delhi: The International Court of Justice has stayed the execution order against Kulbushan Jadhav passed by a Pakistani military court. The Pakistan court had sentenced the Indian national to death for alleged involvement in "spying" and "subversive activities".
India had approached ICJ against the death sentence and accused Pakistan of "egregious" violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. It asserted that Jadhav was kidnapped from Iran where he was involved in business activities after retiring from the Indian Navy. However, Pakistan claimed to have arrested him from Balochistan on March 3, 2016.
Turbulent Past
- Before Kulbhushan Jadhav’s case India has only once approached the ICJ
- In 1971, India filed a case against the jurisdiction of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). This as Pakistan was demanding landing and overflight rights after the India Airlines Lahore flight hijack case. This ruling was against India. ICJ said ICAO had jurisdiction
- In 1999, Pakistan took India to ICJ over India shooting down an Atlantique plane of Pakistan navy flying over Rann of Kutch. This incident occurred in August, 1999 just around the Kargil war. India told ICJ it had no jurisdiction in the matter. ICJ upheld India’s position.
- This was what ICJ had observed limiting its role on disputes between India and Pakistan
“That Pakistan’s Application fails to take into consideration the reservations to the Declaration of India dated 15 September, 1974 filed under Article 36 (2) of its Statute. In particular, Pakistan, being a Commonwealth country, is not entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court as sub-paragraph 2 of paragraph 1 of that Declaration excludes all disputes involving India from the jurisdiction of this Court in respect of any State which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth of Nations."
- But this time India has taken up Kulbhushan Jadhav matter on the grounds that the Vienna Convention on Consular relations are being flouted by Pakistan
- Both countries are signatories to the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention concerning compulsory settlement of disputes, 1963. It provides for compulsory jurisdiction of ICJ for resolution of any dispute arising between parties of the treaty. So, technically India can invoke the jurisdiction of ICJ from the protocol and not under Article 36 mentioned above which was settled in 1999 in India’s favour
Comments
0 comment