Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.


Thank you for
taking the pledge

Vote responsibly as each vote counts
and makes a diffrence


Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
News18 » India
2-min read

'No Reason to Stop The Canary From Singing,' QC Khawar Qureshi at ICJ

Pakistani representative Khawar Qureshi said that India's request over Kulbhushan Jadhav issue was "unnecessary and misconceived" and must be dismissed because "relief sought by India is manifestly unavailable, and the jurisdiction is limited.

Debayan Roy | CNN-News18

Updated:May 15, 2017, 10:01 PM IST
'No Reason to Stop The Canary From Singing,' QC Khawar Qureshi at ICJ
QC Khawar Qureshi presenting Pakistan's case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over the contentious Kulbhushan Jadhav issue on Monday, May 15, 2017. (Photo: CNN-News 18 TV grab)

New Delhi: Representing India, Harish Salve invoked Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963, and the famous Avenna case (Mexico vs USA) decided by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), to try and impress upon the jury to put a stay on the execution of its national Kulbhushan Jadhav, who has been deemed a 'spy' by Pakistan.

ALSO READ: India's ICJ Plea Can't Stop Pak From Executing Jadhav: Law Commission Chief

Pakistani representative Khawar Qureshi said that India's request was "unnecessary and misconceived" and must be dismissed because "relief sought by India is manifestly unavailable, and the jurisdiction is limited." He also said that Vienna Convention is not for spies.

Here are the top pointers from the arguments made by Pakistan:

- Commander Jadhav was arrested from restive Balochistan when he crossed over from Iran

- India invoked a false sense of urgency

- India is on hyper-drive mode; using media to drum up the case

- Dismiss India's plea immediately as there is no urgency in Jadhav's case

- There is no merit in the case either, India has invoked extreme jurisdictions

- Commander Jadhav was never eligible for consular access

- India resorted to misrepresentation of facts

- Jadhav's trail was never rushed through

- Jadhav's passport details are under a cloud

- India glossed over presenting substantive material to the ICJ

- India's claim of a kangaroo court is bizarre

- India has now shifted the goalpost about the urgency and that India’s examples are factually incorrect

- There are four stages of the trial; only one stage was conducted

- Consular access to Jadhav would have been considered at some stage

- India has argued that Article 36 gives it untrammeled rights to consular access and that Pakistan had violated Article 36 of the Vienna Convention since the time Jadhav was arrested. But that is completely false as in the Avenna case which has been cited by India itself, there was no consideration given for providing consular access before the investigation began.

- Pakistan was under the threat of spying, espionage and possible acts of terror being planted by India. In that sense giving consular access to the officials of that state itself is a grave violation of Article 36 (1) (c) of the Vienna convention.

- It was held in the Avenna case that the state which wishes to be granted consular access has the onus upon them to prove that the person whose right is being violated is a national of the applicant state. But in this case, India did not even provide a birth certificate to prove his nationality and did not even come forward to explain his passport. This is a clear violation of a proposition laid down by an ICJ case.

- Article 55 of the convention also states that there should be no interference in the internal affairs of a state and when the state is a victim of spying and possible acts of terror, then granting consular access to the officials of the state may exacerbate tension in the receiving country (Pakistan)

ALSO READ: Ahead of Jadhav Hearing at ICJ, Desperate Pak Tried to Approach Judge

Get the best of News18 delivered to your inbox - subscribe to News18 Daybreak. Follow News18.com on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and on YouTube, and stay in the know with what's happening in the world around you – in real time.

Subscribe to Moneycontrol Pro and gain access to curated markets data, trading recommendations, equity analysis, investment ideas, insights from market gurus and much more. Get Moneycontrol PRO for 1 year at price of 3 months. Use code FREEDOM.

| Edited by: Bijaya Das
Read full article
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch


Live TV

Countdown To Elections Results
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results