Kulbhushan Jadhav Case: India Had 4 Concerns. Here's How ICJ Responded
India scored a major diplomatic victory over Pakistan with the International Court of Justice staying the execution of former Indian Navy officer Kulbhushan Jadhav.
New Delhi: India has scored a major diplomatic victory over Pakistan with the International Court of Justice staying the execution of former Indian Navy officer Kulbhushan Jadhav. The UN's highest judicial body also asked Pakistan to take "all measures" to ensure that Jadhav, sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court for alleged espionage, is not executed till the court delivers its final verdict on the issue.
ICJ President Ronny Abraham, a 63-year-old French academic and practitioner in public international law, asked Pakistan to keep the court informed "of all measures taken" in the implementation of the order. The 11-member bench backed India's contention that there had been a violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as New Delhi's requests for consular access to its national had been denied 16 times.
Following are the provisional measures relief sought by India in the case of Kulbhushan Jadhav and the International Court of Justice's response to them:
India: A relief by way of immediate suspension of the sentence of death awarded to the accused.
ICJ Response: The UN court stayed Jadhav's death sentence.
India: A relief by way of restitution in interregnum by declaring that the sentence of the military court arrived at, in brazen defiance of the Vienna Convention rights under Article 36...in defiance of elementary human rights of an accused which are also to be given effect as mandated under Article 14 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is violative of international law and the provisions of the Vienna Convention.
ICJ Response: The Court notes that the acts alleged by India are capable of falling within the scope of Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention, which, inter alia, guarantees the right of the sending State to communicate with and have access to its nationals in the custody of the receiving State. The Court considers that the alleged failure by Pakistan to provide the requisite consular notifications with regard to the arrest and detention of Jadhav, as well as the alleged failure to allow communication and provide access to him, appear to be capable of falling within the scope of the Vienna Convention ratione materiae.
India: Restraining Pakistan from giving effect to the sentence awarded by the military court, and directing it to take steps to annul the decision of the military court as may be available to it under the law in Pakistan.
ICJ Response: The UN court indicated to Pakistan that it must "take all measures at its disposal" to ensure that Jadhav is not executed pending a final judgment of the Court.
India: If Pakistan is unable to annul the decision, then this Court declare the decision illegal, being violative of international law and treaty rights and restrain Pakistan from acting in violation of the Vienna Convention.
ICJ Response: Pakistan shall inform the Court of all measures taken in implementation of the Order. It further decided to remain seized of the matters which form the subject of the Order until it has rendered its final judgment.
Recommended For You
- Women's World Cup 2017: We Crumbled Under Pressure, Admits Mithali
- Apple iPad Pro 10.5-Inch Review: The Ecosystem That you Always Needed
- Lipstick Under My Burkha Review: An Honest Film That Hits Right Notes
- Women's World Cup 2017: Eng vs Ind - Turning Point - Punam Raut Dismissal
- Pahlaj Nihalani Explains The Need To Cut Words In Amartya Sen Documentary