
India rejects ‘illegal' Court of Arbitration's ruling on J&K dams: ‘Charade at Pakistan's behest'
India on Friday rejected the ruling of a Court of Arbitration that issued a 'supplemental award' on its competence concerning the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The IWT in abeyance, India is no longer under an obligation to take Pakistan's objections, over these projects, into account. (PTI)
These projects are being constructed on the Indus river system, with this development coming after the pause India put on the Indus Waters Treaty in light of the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack.
The ministry of external affairs issued a statement in this regard and said it never recognised the existence of this so-called Court of Arbitration, saying that it is in 'brazen violation' of the Indus Waters Treaty, 1960.
'Today, the illegal Court of Arbitration, purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, albeit in brazen violation of it, has issued what it characterizes as a 'supplemental award' on its competence concerning the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir,' the MEA statement read.
'India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void,' it added. ALSO READ | Pakistan urges India to restore Indus Waters Treaty in multiple letters
The ministry noted that India had placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance after the Pahalgam terrorist attack, which claimed the lives of 26 people, mostly civilians. It said that the nation was no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the treaty till it was in abeyance.
"No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign," the statement read.
The MEA called this move the "latest charade" at Pakistan's behest, accusing Islamabad of trying to escape accountability for being the global epicenter of terrorism.
The external affairs ministry's official statement said, "This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism. Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums." ALSO READ | When will India restore Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan? Amit Shah answers
"India, therefore, categorically rejects this so-called supplemental award as it has rejected all prior pronouncements of this body," the MEA said. Why is Pakistan concerned?
Pakistan has objected to India's construction of the Kishenganga hydroelectric project and Ratle dam project on the Indus river system due to its concerns about the possible impacts on its own water resources.
The Indus system of rivers comprises the main Indus river, along with its five tributaries, the Ravi, the Beas, the Sutlej, the Jhelum and the Chenab.
Pradeep Kumar Saxena, who served as India's Indus Water Commissioner for over six years, had earlier told news agency PTI due to the abeyance, India is in no obligation to follow the restrictions on the "reservoir flushing" of the Kishenganga reservoir and other projects on Western rivers in Jammu and Kashmir. ALSO READ | Pakistan's letters won't change India's stand on Indus Waters Treaty: Jal Shakti minister
Flushing can help desilt India's reservoir, but then filling the entire reservoir could also take days. While under the IWT, India was to do the filling in August, during the peak monsoon period, it can do the process anytime now due to the abeyance of the treaty.
If the filling is done during the sowing season in Pakistan, it could be detrimental, especially since a large part of Punjab in Pakistan is dependent on the Indus and its tributaries for irrigation.
According to the treaty, there are design restrictions on building structures like dams on Indus and its tributaries. However, India is not longer obligated to take the Pakistani concerns onboard. Indus Waters Treaty
The Indus Waters Treaty, 1960, was brokered by the World Bank and set a mechanism for water sharing and information exchange between India and Pakistan.
The treaty was signed after over nine years of negotiations.
While the treaty allocates the Western rivers (Chenab, Jhelum, and Indus) to Pakistan and Eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej) to India for unrestricted use, New Delhi is allowed to use water from the western side for domestic use, non-consumptive use, agricultural and generation of hydro-electric power.
The right to generate hydroelectricity from Western rivers is unrestricted, but subject to conditions for design and operation of the Treaty, a PTI report said.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
41 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Socialist', ‘secular' don't reflect India's core cultural values: Chouhan
Jun 28, 2025 05:30 AM IST VARANASI Amid a national debate on whether the words 'Socialist' and 'Secular' should remain in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution, Union agriculture minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan on Friday invoked India's civilisational ethos to argue that these words do not reflect the country's core cultural values. He came down heavily on the Congress, saying the party should apologise for imposing Emergency in the country 50 years ago. Union minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan addresses a press conference, in Varanasi, Friday. (PTI Photo) He said the word 'secularism', added to the Constitution by the Congress, should be removed, while there's also no need for the word 'socialism' as equality is the basic principle of India. 'Sarva dharma sambhav (equal respect for all religions) is the core of Indian culture, but secularism is not a core value of our was inserted during the Emergency. That is why there should be strong consideration on removing the word 'secularism' from the Indian Constitution,' said the minister, responding to a query at a press conference. 'The second word is 'socialism': Sabko apne jaisa maano (treat everyone like yourself), live and let live, the world is one family are the core of India. That is why there is also no need for the word 'socialism'. It's removal should be considered seriously,' added Chouhan. The minister alleged that the Congress amended the Constitution to save its power as well as to impose its ideological agenda. 'The Congress added words like 'secular' and 'socialist' to the Constitution by amending it so that the party could impose its ideological agenda on the nation. This amendment extended the period of Emergency and the President got the right to declare emergency even without prior approval of Parliament,' he said during a press conference. In response to if his ministry was planning to start 'Ladle Kisan scheme' to make sure that farmers don't go away from farming, Chouhan indicated that such a scheme may be started in near future. He said the Viksit Krishi Sankalp Abhiyan is being run across the country for strengthening agriculture.


Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Indus Treaty arbitration court is illegal, says India
NEW DELHI: India on Friday rejected the Court of Arbitration under the Indus Waters Treaty , describing it as illegal and refusing to recognise its authority to hear cases related to the Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects in J&K. "India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void," MEA said. India's reaction came after the Hague-based Court of Arbitration rendered a "Supplemental Award" on the competence of the court in an arbitration initiated by Pakistan against India. In the Supplemental Award, the court considered its competence to address Pakistan's request to intervene over the decision made by India on April 23 to keep the 1960 Treaty in abeyance following the Pahalgam terror attack. Rejecting the authority of the court, MEA said, "No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign."


The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
India rejects court arbitration on Kishanganga-Ratle dispute, calls it Pakistan's ‘latest charade'
The statement added: 'India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void.' 'Today, the illegal Court of Arbitration, purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, albeit in brazen violation of it, has issued what it characterizes as a 'supplemental award' on its competence concerning the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir,' the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said in a statement Friday. New Delhi: India 'categorically rejected' the supplemental award on competence announced by 'the-so called' Court of Arbitration on the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir, terming it as the 'latest charade' by Pakistan to 'escape accountability' as the 'global epicentre' of terrorism. The strong statement comes as India and Pakistan have continued to lock-horns over the 330 MW Kishanganga project on the Kishanganga river and the 850 MW Ratle hydroelectric project on the Chenab river. The issues first surfaced in 2007, when Pakistan raised six objections to India's Kishanganga project. Four of the six issues were technical, while two were legal. In 2009, Pakistan went to the Court of Arbitration over the two legal questions, which had issued its final award in 2013 allowing India to divert the waters of the Kishanganga with conditions. However, the technical issues remained unresolved, with Islamabad also raising issues with the Ratle hydroelectric project. India maintained that the issue should be dealt with through the appointment of a 'neutral expert', which is another way to resolve disputes under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). In 2015, Pakistan sought the appointment of a neutral expert, however, backtracking later and calling for the disputes to be resolved through a court of arbitration. New Delhi rejected the constitution of a court of arbitration. The World Bank started both processes–appointing a neutral expert and seeking the formation of a court of arbitration–simultaneously. India has not participated in the arbitration proceedings since. Earlier this year, the neutral expert–Michael Lino–backed India's stance, ruling that he had the competence to deal with the issue at hand. However, following the Pahalgam terrorist attack that killed 26 people, New Delhi moved to hold the treaty in 'abeyance' until Islamabad stops supporting cross-border terrorism. 'Following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India has in exercise of its rights as a sovereign nation under international law, placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism,' the MEA statement said. It added: 'Until such time that the Treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the Treaty. No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign.' Pakistan has called India's move to hold the treaty in abeyance unlawful and has promised that any diversion of the Indus waters could constitute an act of war. However, New Delhi has maintained its diplomatic position. 'This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism. Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums,' the MEA said (Edited by Tony Rai) Also Read: With Indus Waters Treaty on hold, India working to revive Tulbul project on Kashmir's Wular Lake