CoA says it's competent to deal with Indian Waters Treaty dispute; MEA terms court illegal
The Court of Arbitration (CoA) at The Hague asserted its jurisdiction over the Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects dispute, despite India's decision to put the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. India firmly rejected the CoA's ruling, deeming it "illegal" and a breach of the IWT. India has stated that the treaty will remain suspended until Pakistan ceases cross-border terrorism.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
New Delhi: The Hague-based Court of Arbitration (CoA), examining the design of Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects at Pakistan 's behest, in a 'supplementary award' declared that it was competent to address the dispute under the Indus Waters Treaty IWT ) despite India 's decision to put the agreement in abeyance.India, however, firmly rejected this order, terming the court itself as "illegal" - a position taken much before the Pahalgam attacks. New Delhi had decided to cooperate only with neutral expert, asserting that two simultaneous processes cannot be in play."This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicentre of terrorism. Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums," Ministry of External Affairs said.India has maintained that the constitution of this "so-called arbitral body" is a "serious breach" of IWT. It has not participated in any of the proceedings of the court. Thus, MEA said, any award or decision is "illegal and per se void".India made it clear that the treaty will remain in abeyance until Pakistan "abjures its support for cross-border terrorism ". MEA added India is not bound by any 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."CoA, however, said the text of the treaty "does not provide for the unilateral 'abeyance' or 'suspension' of the treaty... Rather, the treaty provides for its continuation in force until terminated by mutual consent by India and Pakistan... Accordingly, the text of the treaty, read in light of its object and purpose, does not allow either." CoA has held that these findings apply similarly with respect to the competence of the neutral expert.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
20 minutes ago
- India Today
Trump says he'll resolve North Korea conflict, cites good ties with Kim Jong-un
US President Donald Trump on Friday said he will "get the conflict solved with North Korea." At an Oval Office event where he highlighted his efforts to resolve global conflicts, Trump was asked whether he had written a letter to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, as was reported this did not directly answer the question, but said: "I've had a good relationship with Kim Jong Un and get along with him, really great. So we'll see what saying there's a potential conflict, I think we'll work it out," Trump said. "If there is, it wouldn't involve us." Seoul-based NK News, a website that monitors North Korea, reported this month that North Korea's delegation at the United Nations in New York had repeatedly refused to accept a letter from Trump to and Kim held three summits during Trump's 2017-2021 first term and exchanged a number of letters that Trump called "beautiful," before the unprecedented diplomatic effort broke down over US demands that Kim give up his nuclear his second term Trump has acknowledged that North Korea is a "nuclear power." The White House said on June 11 that Trump would welcome communications again with Kim, while not confirming that any letter was Korea has shown no interest in returning to talks since the breakdown of Trump's diplomacy in has, instead, significantly expanded its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, and developed close ties with Russia through direct support for Moscow's war in Ukraine, to which Pyongyang has provided both troops and weaponry.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Time of India
an hour 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
an hour 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
