Latest news with #ViennaConventionontheLawofTreaties
Express Tribune
6 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Water victory
Listen to article What began as a supplemental request has now crystallised into a full-fledged award — a binding, enforceable judgment that firmly upholds Pakistan's position under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The August 8 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague is a landmark moment, not merely for Pakistan's water security but also for the principle that international agreements cannot be set aside on a whim. India must allow the waters of the Western rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — to flow for Pakistan's unrestricted use, in line with the treaty's provisions. Since 2016, Pakistan has objected to India's designs for projects like Kishanganga and Ratle, arguing that excessive pondage and unrestricted spillway gates risk violating the treaty, which protect Pakistan's "unrestricted use" of Western rivers. The PCA's ruling effectively aligns with this interpretation, limiting India's operational flexibility. Equally significant is the court's rejection of India's April 2025 declaration that it would hold the IWT "in abeyance." The award makes clear that unilateral suspension is not permissible under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It instead affirms that the treaty's dispute resolution system is hierarchical but interconnected: while a Neutral Expert may decide certain technical issues, a Court of Arbitration can interpret treaty provisions, and both outcomes are equally final and binding. This ruling is the result of Islamabad's persistence since 2016 in seeking arbitration despite considerable diplomatic headwinds. But the real test begins now. Implementation has long been the Achilles' heel of international rulings. Pakistan must invest in technical capacity for water monitoring and maintain diplomatic pressure to ensure compliance. This award is a significant win — but its true worth will be measured by whether its promises flow, uninterrupted, from the rivers to the fields.
Business Recorder
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Indus waters case: FO welcomes The Hague court decision
ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office on Monday welcomed a decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague to issue a supplemental award in the Indus Waters case. The ruling urges India to resume the operation of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), which New Delhi has held in abeyance since May. In April, India suspended the treaty following an attack in the Pahalgam area of Indian-occupied Kashmir, which killed 26 people. India blamed Pakistan for the attack, though Islamabad denied involvement. Pakistan condemned India's suspension of the treaty as an 'act of war,' highlighting that the IWT contains no provisions allowing unilateral suspension. Islamabad has also threatened legal action, citing violations of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The PCA's supplemental award, announced on 27 June 2025, reaffirmed the court's jurisdiction over the dispute involving Pakistan and India's hydroelectric projects at Kishenganga and Ratle. The court declared its ongoing responsibility to ensure a timely and fair resolution of the matter. The Foreign Office described the award as a vindication of Pakistan's position that the treaty remains valid and operational, and criticised India's unilateral decision to suspend it. A statement issued by the Government of Pakistan called on India to 'immediately resume the normal functioning of the Indus Waters Treaty and fulfil its treaty obligations.' It also welcomed the PCA's ruling on competence, which rejected India's suspension of the treaty, expressing optimism for the forthcoming award on the merits following hearings held in July 2024. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif reiterated Pakistan's readiness to engage in meaningful dialogue with India on outstanding issues including Jammu and Kashmir, water, trade, and terrorism. According to the PCA, the treaty does not allow either party to unilaterally suspend or hold it in abeyance. The court stated such actions would undermine the treaty's dispute resolution mechanisms. The court further noted that India's position was not justifiable under international law. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Daily Tribune
01-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Tribune
Shura committee reviews 17 draft laws
Seventeen draft laws, including changes to Bahrain's Penal Code and a set of international agreements, have been reviewed by the Shura Council's Foreign Affairs, Defence and National Security Committee. Chaired by Dr Ali bin Mohammed Al Rumaihi, the committee held 14 meetings during the third session of the sixth legislative term, covering legislation on criminal law, residency rules, traffic offences, and a range of foreign treaties. Three proposed amendments to the Penal Code were examined, including one to add a final paragraph to Article 107. The proposal came from five members: Nancy Dina Ely Khudori, Khalid Hussain Al Maskati, Redha Abdulla Faraj, Dr Abdulaziz Hassan Abul, and Dr Bassam Ismail Al Binmohammed. Other drafts sought to amend the 2017 law on alternative punishments, revise Article 56 of the 2014 Traffic Law, and add a new clause—Article 7 repeated—to the 1965 immigration and residency law. Each of these stemmed from proposals passed by the elected chamber. International agreements International agreements featured heavily on the agenda. The committee reviewed treaties with the UAE, Oman, South Korea, Kuwait, Hungary, and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. These covered tax arrangements, investment rules, and maritime cooperation. Bahrain will also join the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the 1949 Convention on Road Traffic. One item concerned the amended World Trade Organization protocol on fisheries support, which has now been added to the Marrakesh Agreement's annex. The committee gave it the green light. Still under review is a draft law to ratify the Makkah Agreement on anti-corruption cooperation among member states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. It was referred to the committee after His Majesty the King ordered the close of the session.
Mint
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Mint
India has held off the Indus Waters Treaty with due legitimacy
Following the terror attack of 22 April on civilians in Pahalgam that India traced to Pakistan, the Indian government announced that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 would be held in 'abeyance" with immediate effect. While 'abeyance' lacks a formal status in international law, the closest corresponding legal concept is 'suspension' under Article 62 (1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). It recognizes a change in circumstances as a valid but narrowly constructed ground for suspending or terminating treaty obligations if: (a) the change is unforeseeable and fundamental and (b) radically transforms a party's obligations. Given these conditions, can India's actions be justified within the international law framework? Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | India can gain Indus leverage over Pakistan Fundamental change: A major point of contention is whether Pakistan's support of cross-border terrorism amounts to a fundamental change in circumstances. In the case of A. Racke GmbH & Co. vs Hauptzollamt Mainz, the European Court of Justice recognized the outbreak of hostilities as constituting a fundamental change of circumstances. The IWT's preamble acknowledges that the satisfactory utilization of the Indus river system requires continued cooperation in a spirit of goodwill and friendship. Similarly, Article VII emphasizes future cooperation and 'common interests in the optimum development of the Rivers." These provisions indicate good faith as an essential condition for the IWT's performance. Pakistan's persistent acts of support for cross-border terrorism have undermined the very foundation of cooperative engagement essential to fulfil the objective of the IWT. These acts have also critically altered the political landscape, impacting human rights, peace and security in the region and making the treaty impossible to sustain on moral grounds. The opinion of the UN Secretary-General's Study on the Legal Validity of the Undertaking Concerning Minorities, which acknowledges the relevance of moral impossibility in the context of treaties, offers a supporting precedent. Also Read: The IMF's Pakistan loan spotlights the case for voting power reform Climate change: At the time of IWT negotiations, climate change had neither joined the mainstream political debate nor the legal landscape. The IWT focused on the apportioning of water flows and management of rivers, rather than on water sharing per se. It covered dam construction for hydro-power generation, etc, but recent studies have shown how climate change severely affects hydrological circles. According to the US space agency Nasa, the Indus Basin is the world's second-most water-stressed aquifer. The IWT's failure to accommodate climate change has implications. India's climate targets include the goal of carbon neutrality by 2070; it also envisages achieving 50% of electricity generation from non-fossil fuels by 2030. The IWT restricts ambitious dam projects by India along the Indus river system, thereby impacting its ability to meet its goals. The effects of climate change could constitute a fundamental and unforeseen change of circumstances under the IWT as well. Also Read: Hydropower: Let pump dams fill gaps in India's clean energy supply Legal efforts by the government: Although this is the first time India has announced the abeyance of the IWT, New Delhi has made consistent attempts to modify it. Citing climate change, a parliamentary standing committee in 2021 recommended re-negotiation of the IWT. After this, India sent two notifications to Islamabad to modify the IWT in line with Article XII (3). New Delhi highlighted an altered demographic profile, agricultural use, depleting groundwater and the burning need for clean energy as fundamental and unforeseen circumstances that necessitated a reassessment of the Treaty. More importantly, India also referred to continued cross-border terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir as impacting the operation of the IWT. Pakistan insisted that any discussion on it should be undertaken through the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC). In contrast, India feels that the PIC, a byproduct of the Treaty, does not have a mandate to play such a role. Article X11 (3) allows modification of the IWT only by means of a new agreement concluded between the two governments. Also Read: Nitin Pai: Operation Sindoor leaves India better placed for the next round An assessment of other treaty practices, like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, indicates that treaty bodies are entrusted with implementation, whereas treaty modification is a political decision. The last meeting of the PIC took place in May 2022, which suggests a breakdown of the IWT's institutional machinery. Hence, the post-Pahalgam-attack decision of the Indian government to hold the IWT in 'abeyance' should be viewed from the larger perspective of New Delhi's prolonged and exhaustive efforts, which can reasonably be said to have exhausted all legal remedies under the 1960 Treaty. Climate change has fundamentally altered water availability in the Indus Basin. Given Pakistan's refusal to re-negotiate the IWT in the face of climate change and its support of terrorism that has nullified the spirit of cooperation, making the Treaty's performance impossible, there is sufficient legal basis for India's invocation of changed circumstances. However, India needs to tread cautiously, considering the ecological impact of climate change and the region's interdependence. Moreover, decisions like these risk being followed by other state parties elsewhere that might be looking for a pretext to unilaterally terminate treaties and other international agreements. In addition, there is always the risk of retaliatory actions that could create complications. The author is senior associate professor at the faculty of legal studies, South Asian University.
Hans India
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
Suspension of IWT a strategic weapon against Pakistan: Defence expert
New Delhi: Brigadier Vijay Sagar Dheman (Retd), a prominent Defence expert, on Thursday stated that India holds the legitimate right to use the suspension of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) as a strategic weapon against Pakistan, asserting that no one can prevent New Delhi from doing so. Following the brutal terror attack in Pahalgam on April 22, India took a series of calculated actions against Pakistan, including the suspension of the IWT. In addition, India launched 'Operation Sindoor' targeting high-value terror hideouts in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir. On May 10, a ceasefire understanding was reached between India and Pakistan, after which Islamabad demanded the lifting of the IWT suspension. Speaking to IANS, Brigadier Dheman said, "In the CCS meeting held on April 20, one of the decisions taken was to suspend the Indus Water Treaty, and after that we would start planning how to take revenge for the Pahalgam massacre." "Due to IWT suspension, we stopped sharing of water data which was done daily earlier, plus we started filling our Baglihar Dam and Salal Dam. What happened was that the water level of Pakistan, the Indus River, went down even further and there was a possibility of some damage to their crops and along with that, the water level of their dams, Tarbela Dam or Diamer-Bhasha Dam, went down impacting electricity generation." "Then we said that we are opening all our gates for desilting. So, we did desilting of our dams in this way, and we created a flood situation for Pakistan. Due to that, when there was a flood in Pakistan's Punjab, they also suffered a lot of losses," he added. Responding to concerns that India cannot unilaterally exit an international treaty, Brigadier Dheman said, "People within India are saying that this is an international treaty, brokered by the World Bank, so how can you exit it unilaterally? We can do that under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969. It is very clear in its Articles 60 and 62 that if any such incident occurs, then we can walk out unilaterally." "Who can stop us from leaving? Pakistan will suffer damage. So, I would like to say that we can use this treaty as a weapon. And we have just shown the trailer to Pakistan," the retired Army officer concluded.
