Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on Dawn.com.

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience

.

Experts wonder why ICJ jurisdiction was recognised in March

Updated May 19, 2017 12:36pm

ISLAMABAD: Though Pakistani officials seem confident of their chances before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) despite the reprieve granted to India, legal experts at home have assailed the way the world court handled the case of Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav.

Explore: Criticism at home over ICJ decision on Jadhav

Former Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Dr Farogh Naseem was of the view that Pakistan should have immediately withdrawn its March 29, 2017 declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Instead of contesting the matter, this should have been done immediately after the Indians took Jadhav’s case to the ICJ, he said.

Why did Pakistan not take the glaring and brutal human rights violations in India-held Kashmir before the court, despite the fact that Islamabad had a strong case in this regard, he asked, then answered his own question, saying that India had not conceded to the court’s compulsory jurisdiction in this matter.

This point of view was also shared by former Additional Attorney General Tariq Khokhar, an expert in international law. He regretted that Pakistan had accepted ICJ jurisdiction through a declaration, which should have been withdrawn once Pakistan knew India would invoke the ICJ’s jurisdiction against it.

Being an arbitration forum, each contesting state was allowed to nominate one person of its choice to act as an ad hoc judge at the ICJ, Mr Khokhar recalled.

India did nominate one but Pakistan did not, he regretted, adding that Pakistan’s counsel did not argue for the full allotted time either. He deplored these failures, and asked: “How can we not execute a foreign terrorist who was nabbed red-handed when we are hanging our terrorists?”

Read: Who is Kulbhushan Jadhav?

Human rights activist Asma Jahangir suggested that rather than making the ICJ ruling a matter of ego, “We should sit down, join our heads and find a way out by going through the ruling thoroughly”.

“Who gave the opinion to deny consular access to Jadhav in the first place,” she questioned, and asked whether this was in the interest of the country. “Will it not endanger the rights of the prisoners languishing in Indian jails? Can one change international law?”

Another senior counsel, on condition of anonymity, said the only way out for Pakistan was to contest the court’s jurisdiction and assure it that Pakistan had no immediate plans to execute Jadhav in a manner which may upend ICJ proceedings.

Pakistan should also request a fast-track hearing and consider holding a fresh trial for the spy in civilian courts by quashing the conviction handed down by the military court, he said.

Referring to ICJ’s restraining order, he said: “Sadly, it is a resounding and unqualified defeat.”

He was also of the view that the national security exception in the 2008 bilateral agreement between the two countries, which Pakistan was banking on, was only applicable to additional safeguards provided under the agreement. This agreement and the exception could not supersede the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) 1963, he said.

Examine: 'Pakistan didn't fail': 5 things you should know about ICJ's decision on Jadhav

International law expert Ahmer Bilal Soofi was of the view that Pakistan should prepare for the second phase of this case, which was more important because it would be contested on merit and would provide Pakistan the chance to document India’s intervention inside Pakistan through Jadhav.

Islamabad could insist on cooperation from India on the investigation into Jadhav’s activities, he said, adding that Pakistan should also argue that the national security exception in the 2008 bilateral agreement was binding.

But former law minister legal expert S.M. Zafar said that prime facie, it was a wrong decision.

“I could not understand why the ICJ issued a stay order in the Jadhav case without even understanding the case,” he said.

“After reading the order sheet, what I could understand was that the ICJ issued the stay order saying that since the parties in the dispute could not convey their point of view and the court needs further assistance from both countries,” he said.

Though Mr Zafar said that the restraining order was not binding on Pakistan, it was considered a strong opinion.

According to him, Pakistan should change its legal strategy and should concentrate more on the terrorism angle.

Retired Justice Wajihud­din Ahmed also termed the ICJ order “poor”. “Even a civil judge of the subordinate judiciary would not handle the case the way the ICJ did,” he said.

“The court’s job is to examine the case and pass an appropriate order, it is not the role of a court to interact with the relevant quarters for the execution of that order,” he further said.

“I can conclude that this was a political decision, based on the influence of India with the international community,” he said.

Barrister Masroor Shah opined that the ICJ order was not based on any statute or legal precedence.

Published in Dawn, May 19th, 2017


Comments (110) Closed

tomUHTO TAWMAYTO
May 19, 2017 07:53am

Asma Jahangir seems to be the only one talking sensibly; the others seem to be reacting like a stung child

Raj
May 19, 2017 07:56am

If you have enough why don't you prosecute him civil court

ash28
May 19, 2017 07:59am

Follow the cool head of Asma Jahangir!

Joe
May 19, 2017 08:00am

"Former Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Dr Farogh Naseem was of the view that Pakistan should have immediately withdrawn its March 29, 2017 declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Instead of contesting the matter, this should have been done immediately after the Indians took Jadhav’s case to the ICJ, he said." I dont agree with the above.If you are right ,why should you run away from facing facts. Did you not take naval dowing case to ICJ? India challenged it and won Now India took this case to ICJ and you challenged it and lost.Face the facts both times in world opinion India was right.

Mohit(US)
May 19, 2017 08:07am

So many experts telling alternate ways which Pak had.. wondering why no one came ahead when they had the chance.. evryone has perfect hindsight..

vk
May 19, 2017 08:29am

The decision of ICJ was made under Vienna convention. Pakistan is member of it so they should have given him consular access.That's all. Jurisdiction and other things doesn't matter here.Now they are looking for some excuse so this letter of jurisdiction is coming into play.Compulsory jurisdiction vs legal jurisdiction are all to divert the attention from real issue which is Vienna convention.

Sampath
May 19, 2017 08:45am

I feel that it is the secrecy of the proceedings that Pakistan is keeping that has led to ICJ's verdict. It may not be late to open up the case and give counselor access.

Bhoot
May 19, 2017 08:46am

Without going into the legal arguments, put a hand of your heart and think if Kulbhushan Jhadav needed to be provided with consular access.

Good guy...
May 19, 2017 08:51am

Everything fishy in this matter...

Balaji
May 19, 2017 09:05am

You can claim he caused the great Britain fire as well. We don't care. But give us proof before touching one of our national. And no, don't even bring up the confession video point. You just embarrass yourself with it. And two passports? Well claim 120 passports. Without giving us consular access there's no way we can know for sure and you have such a great record of validating your claims,right ??

Khalifa
May 19, 2017 09:08am

I fully endorse the views of Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed.

sachin
May 19, 2017 09:09am

If Pakistan has so much reason and evidence against Jadav's involvement in terrorism, then why not go for a proper trial in courts ?

Truth triumph
May 19, 2017 09:12am

Do not find reasons to blame others for all your problems.... Read the judgement. Judgement is in much details and on technical ground rather than pharaphrasing it as "politics".

krishnan
May 19, 2017 09:22am

Being patriotic is fine.listen to asma.if consular.access had been given the verdict would not have been questioned.denying access indicates weak.evidence.and funny how judges.integrity is freely being questioned

Ash20
May 19, 2017 09:23am

Good question and comments by Ms. Jahangir and Anonymous lawyer.

Sajid baig
May 19, 2017 09:23am

This verdict is not only poor but also unprecedented. The ICJ should have avoided to intervene in the matter that is purely criminal and pertains to national security of a country. I also agree with opinion of some jusrists that Jadhav's case should preferable be heard and decided by a civilian court.

Jawaid kamal
May 19, 2017 09:31am

These "experts" were so quite all along before the judgement.

Dexter
May 19, 2017 09:35am

Not providing counseler access and trying the case in Millitary court was the reason of this unanimous decision by ICJ. Arguments by Pakistan in ICJ was not the reson.

Khurram Khan
May 19, 2017 09:47am

There's a good time coming, boys, a good time coming. We may not live to see the day, but Earth shall glisten in the ray of the good time coming.

Shivaji
May 19, 2017 09:49am

I can conclude that this was a political decision, based on the influence of India with the international community - Childish statement.

Ashraf
May 19, 2017 09:54am

Were we not aware of international law to get caught unaware like this ? our end did not use the alloted 90 mins properly ans we are blaming India despite having a strong case no , we have only incompetence to answer for this defeat.

Zakir Ali Afghan
May 19, 2017 09:55am

Pakistan is going to execute him anyway as he has been sentenced by military courts. In military courts the accused is almost 100% guilty .

DSK
May 19, 2017 09:57am

Isn't it funny, when the whole world is saying there isn't any concrete evidence against Jadav and cannot be punished without providing proof, only Pakistan feels that self confession is a ultimate proof. What is even more funnier is calling ICJ judges stupid for the judgment.

Desivideshi
May 19, 2017 09:58am

By accepting jurisdiction you prove that you are a law abiding nation ..not a rogue one ..The day you stop looking for short term goals and base your decision keeping in view of future generation, the country can clear lot of mess around .

chanakya
May 19, 2017 09:59am

"I can conclude that this was a political decision, based on the influence of India with the international community" - Keep misleading your country with these irresponsible statements.

Asad Baig
May 19, 2017 10:01am

The moment India took the case to ICJ all those who understand world politics and India's Influence knew that it would be easier for India to get the decision it wants rather than Pakistan. Pakistan may have a strong case legally,but sadly more often than not they are not able to convince the World at large that what they are saying is in-fact True!

TR
May 19, 2017 10:03am

Some of the legal luminaries seem not to be good even at hindsight. My advice to the government and powers that be of Pakistan is not to take any action for which you may have to repent later.

AKKS
May 19, 2017 10:03am

"Former Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Dr Farogh Naseem was of the view that Pakistan should have immediately withdrawn its March 29, 2017 declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Instead of contesting the matter, this should have been done immediately after the Indians took Jadhav’s case to the ICJ, he said."

So he means Pakistan should not have contested the case in the ICJ knowing that it is fake and what you are doing is wrong! Great !

KJ
May 19, 2017 10:03am

@Bhoot : Very well said. Effectively what you are saying is, what does your conscience say? Do you truly believe that you are affording justice to Kulbhushan Jhadav?

dynamite
May 19, 2017 10:05am

"Why did Pakistan not take the glaring and brutal human rights violations in India-held Kashmir before the court, despite the fact that Islamabad had a strong case in this regard, he asked,"..

  • Well cause the knowledgeable people in Pakistan know that Islamabad does NOT have a strong case ...
dynamite
May 19, 2017 10:06am

My worry s that Kulbhushan is already dead..and things for pakistan just became more complicated !!

ERZINGA
May 19, 2017 10:12am

Now everyone has a different opinion, everyone knew something or the other was wrong, everyone had a better idea, basically everyone wants to be in the limelight. However before the verdict everyone knew in Pakistan knew it was an open and shut case and would win the case hands down. Only Asma Jehangir seems to know what she is saying. Rest are trying to get their 15 minutes of fame.

F35
May 19, 2017 10:13am

Pls keep in mind that its a unanimous decision............15 jurors cant be wrong.......

AKKS
May 19, 2017 10:15am

Try Jadhav in a civilian court and provide counsular access to him. It Pakistan has all the evidence against him, use that in the civilian court and win this case. Whatever you say, no one in the international community will listen to you unless and until you provide these basic rights !

Matoda
May 19, 2017 10:17am

It was army, who highlighted the case by giving death sentence to Jadav. It was again army who took stand against the consular access. Seems, no one has recognised that or they are afraid.

Pangkaj Bhattachargee
May 19, 2017 10:18am

Itseems that pakistan has full of legal experts . Where they were before hearing the case at ICJ.

SYED H
May 19, 2017 10:19am

@Joe ""Former Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Dr Farogh Naseem was of the view that Pakistan should have immediately withdrawn its March 29, 2017 declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Instead of contesting the matter, this should have been done immediately after the Indians took Jadhav’s case to the ICJ, he said." I dont agree with the above.If you are right ,why should you run away from facing facts. Did you not take naval dowing case to ICJ? India challenged it and won Now India took this case to ICJ and you challenged it and lost.Face the facts both times in world opinion India was right."

Actually you are wrong: on the Atlantique incident, Pakistan took the case to the ICJ, but India argued what you say Pakistan should not, which is say ICJ had no jurisdiction (India said this was because disputes between Commonwealth States were exempt). So it was India that "ran away from the facts" rather than prove it was right when it needed to, unlike Pakistan.

PakPukudenguta
May 19, 2017 10:25am

Now, after reading all the opinions reported, I am convinced that Pakistan needs to import "genes", not the Arab ones which they have in part, but the "vegetarian ones". I never thought the so called legal luminaries of Pakistan lack faculties of perceptions and judgements so badly. It is proved that with consular access and open trial of Kulbhushan Jadhav, the whole of Pakistan will be exposed as duds and murderers. That is the reason they are scared to go for them. Can you do these two and then hang Kulbhushan Jadhav?? No, you can not.

Arun-KS
May 19, 2017 10:28am

2 things to take- (1) Asma Jahangir questioned, “Who gave the opinion to deny consular access to Jadhav in the first place.” (2) A senior counsel, on condition of anonymity said, “Sadly, it is a resounding and unqualified defeat for Pakistan.”

Shivaji
May 19, 2017 10:29am

Its good to face the facts. No hide and seek.

AK
May 19, 2017 10:35am

Asma Jahangir is totally right on this issue. Pakistani State has no credibility when it comes to human rights

Amit
May 19, 2017 10:37am

This is clear that pakistan has no evidence except the confession video and so called doctored Passport. pakistan will definitely lose the final trail in ICJ in coming days. The ICJ also clearly mentioned that the circumstances of arrest is suspicious.

RaMg
May 19, 2017 10:37am

If Pakistan thinks it can play it's cards, the world has its cards too. Fool me once, twice......

R.Kannan
May 19, 2017 10:38am

The ICJ has only stayed the execution till it hears the full matter. However, the real issue has to be whether the case against Jadhav will stand scrutiny in a normal court of law. The reluctance to try him in a civilian court, with normal safeguards of human rights, suggests the case is weak.

Bharat
May 19, 2017 10:39am

@tomUHTO TAWMAYTO agreed

Optimistic
May 19, 2017 10:41am

If other issues ( Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yamen, Libya,etc ) could have resolved like that, millions of lives and $$ could have been saved.

Pakistan and India should resolve all their issues like that, but we know for sure from recent court cases in Pakistan, that justice is blind and the powerful party in the case is blind's white stick.

raj kumar
May 19, 2017 10:45am

So many sane voices after the event,perfect hindsight experts,except 1 may I ask all these experts as to why they are afraid to put the blame squarely where it lies.Or are they waiting for another inside story from Dawn.

Princess_of_DHUMP
May 19, 2017 10:47am

Same experts were also predicting Pakistan's 'win'. Grapes are sour. Let's learn to accept setbacks, gracefully

DeLHIDUDE
May 19, 2017 10:49am

In my estimate, sadly, is that Mr Yadhav is dead or is almost dead. That is perhaps the reason for Pakistan to deny consular access.

lafanga
May 19, 2017 10:52am

Why wa Kulbushan carrying a GOI issued fake passport? This crucial question has not yet been answered by India and now it is diluted in this whole ICJ drama. Someone needs to uncover what was the Jindal meeting all about. I believe the Jindal visit and ICJ hearings are connected.

andy
May 19, 2017 10:55am

There would be the usual conspiracy theories that India got it in its favour because of its political and economic clout. It is already hinted in this blog. Knowing Pakistan as we do it would have painted the world red if it had any real evidence. Since it is not there hence the secret military court trial. Do Pakistanis think that the world is foolish and people can not read between the lines. I am astonished that none of the Pakistani commentators has questioned the secret military court trial.

Sabir Baloch
May 19, 2017 10:56am

so strange to see mostly Indian commentators on Pakistani Newspaper website !

vishal
May 19, 2017 11:00am

All are giving their expert advices but can't put pressure on ICJ. Cases are won on the basis of its merits and presentations.

BK
May 19, 2017 11:00am

So many legal luminaries, questioning the legal opinion of ICJ. But none questioning the functioning of military courts- trying civilians in a democratic country! Really wierd legal luminaries.

Deepak
May 19, 2017 11:01am

For me it appears that this is a game plan by both countries to fool respective population!. Nawaz mia is mired in scandals and Modiji has his own compulsions to get more votes and make people forget the high prices of almost everything!!!!

Bharatiya Australian
May 19, 2017 11:01am

Same people who are questioning the intelligence of 11 judicial panel would have come out in their praise had the result been different. As usual conspiracy theories at work.

Had this whole issue been handled transparently without prejudice and without the need for a scapegoat to score points, lots of heart burns could have been avoided.

V. GOVINDARAJAN
May 19, 2017 11:02am

Pakistan should take this as a prestige issue. When Ajmal Kasab was caught, he was given full legal support. Trials were in open court. He was given legal support even in the Supreme Court of India. He was only hanged after all legal proceedings. Pakistan did not own up to him. Here India owns Kulbushan Jadhav. All India wants is counsular access & open trial. If he is indeed found guilty, he must face the conviction of the courts. India will accept Pakistan's decision then. Instead of challenging ICJ, please look internally & take your actions. Delivery of justices should be fair. Ensuring this will hugely improve Pakistan;s image internationally

mangoman
May 19, 2017 11:04am

Experts wonder why ICJ jurisdiction was recognised in March...

Where were these experts earlier? Hindsight they say is always 20/20, you don't need experts for that.

TQ
May 19, 2017 11:06am

Jadhav should have been given consular access. This is a serious mistake, and this also shows the weaknesses of the decision makers in Pakistan.

Anyway, learn from your mistakes, what is done is done, now move forward and do the right thing. Give him consular access.

Now, moving forward, decision makers in Pakistan should take advise from experts in their relevant fields, and should follow accordingly. I understand that people in power are mentally bankrupt that is why these mistakes are repeatedly committed.

Mahmud
May 19, 2017 11:07am

Wow we have so many experts with varying opinions! As a common citizen with no legal knowledge, my question is very simple -- why was the option of Ad hoc Judge not availed by Pakistan; if our case is strong, which no doubt it is, why an experienced attorney was not appointed; who and why is supporting India by presenting our case such shoddily? Questions to ponder on.

raja
May 19, 2017 11:08am

Retired Justice Wajihud­din Ahmed also termed the ICJ order “poor”. “Even a civil judge of the subordinate judiciary would not handle the case the way the ICJ did,” he said.

This kind of sheer arrogance took you down.

PakPukudenguta
May 19, 2017 11:11am

Ultimately India will make its "cold blooded murder" charge stick on the forehead of Pakistan for good. I predicted the outcome of the ICJ decision exactly as it turned out to be. Now I am prophesying: This episode will ignite and result in the "mother of all wars". You will shortly see an enormous exodus of families and money and investments to Dubai, UK, Canada and US. From which country? You guessed it correctly!!!!

kris wa
May 19, 2017 11:12am

India offered consular access to Kasab from day one and pakistan disowned him. Some pakistani media and India had to prove that he was a pakistani by going to his village. Now, India owns Jhadav from day one, but pakistan not allowing the consular access. For one Jhadav, hundreds of pakistanis will suffer as India will not grant any visa to pakistanis including medical visas and inmates. Plus, India will not sign any pact with pakistan in the future. learned lesson from Cricket MOU and 2008 bi-lateral agreement. At the end common people will suffer.

VINEETH
May 19, 2017 11:13am

@Sabir Baloch Indian online community is larger than the entire population of Pakistan, and we love bashing each other. So, it isn't surprising to find a flood of Indian comments in Pakistani newspapers.

SYED H
May 19, 2017 11:14am

@Joe You are wrong: on the Atlantique incident (the naval aircraft that was shot down), Pakistan took the case to the ICJ, but India argued what you say Pakistan should not, which is say ICJ had no jurisdiction (India insisted that disputes between Commonwealth States were exempt from the ICJ). So it was India that "ran away from the facts" rather than prove it was right when it needed to, unlike Pakistan.

Pakistan could have indeed done what Former Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Dr Farogh Naseem advised, which was that Pakistan should have immediately withdrawn its March 29 2017 declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. But it did not.

The first stage of this trial was only about whether the ICJ had jurisdiction, a decision made easier by Pakistan's decision not to withdraw its declaration in March giving ICJ jurisdiction. The second stage is the more substantive one where the contest will occur on the merits of the arguments put forth, not jurisdiction.

Shahid
May 19, 2017 11:15am

@lafanga How can India explain the two or twenty passports allegedly found with Jadhav without even talking to him? Now you know why consular access is required? It's time to understand why international conventions exists, and respect principles of natural justice.

Nitin
May 19, 2017 11:19am

@andy It is a state in denial , No one knows what question to ask ? I am surprised except Dawn no other publication in Pakistan has asked hard questions like where is the other evidence in this case apart from a vedio?

Zizpong
May 19, 2017 11:21am

@lafanga to answer your questions, the trial has to be held in civilian courts not the shady military courts. Even Kasab was hanged after proper trial.

Yogi baba
May 19, 2017 11:21am

Pakistan lost the plot in ICJ by not giving a fair trial in an open civil court and denying consular access on humanitarian ground.

Rohit Singh
May 19, 2017 11:25am

Despite experts saying repeatedly confessional video is not considered credible evidence in such cases, legal team went ahead with that piece of evidence instead of concentrating on the effort to build other solid evidence.

Govardhan Bhure
May 19, 2017 11:25am

Pak doesn't has proof regarding jadhav's activity in the Pakistan. They forced Jadhav and made confession video.where they asking to play in ICJ but ICJ refused to Play it.This feels very embarrassing to all Pak .I also accept you should feel it .

Chandra
May 19, 2017 11:27am

@Sabir Baloch That's because Dawn.com provides a excellent platform for Indians to directly engage in conversation with Pakistani society on issues of mutual interest. Long may this continue.

LS
May 19, 2017 11:27am

@lafanga "Why waS Kulbushan carrying a GOI issued fake passport? " - That is YOUR assertion. Acquiring a fake passport is a petty crime in every country and it isn't difficult either.

Abdu satt
May 19, 2017 11:28am

Experts still wondering? Here India has already thrashed us badly in the ICJ.

Indian
May 19, 2017 11:29am

ICJ has given a verdict that it has jurisdiction. Its not upto pakistan to declare yes or no. Otherwise every nation when caught acting against international law will simply declare ICJ has no jurisdiction.

Muneer
May 19, 2017 11:29am

Recognition of ICJ compulsory jurisdiction does seems to have a linkage with Kulbushahn hearings.Acceptance was on 29Mar 2017,but more important was that Pakistan could have withdrawn it by 15May 2017 which it did not. So ICJ fixed hearing on 15 May 17.There is a clause in Pakistan's acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction that it will not be applicable on National Security issues. But then Pakistan did not invoke the clause of National Security issue to challenge the jurisdiction of ICJ in Kulbushahn case.Thus suspicion of complicity of Nawaz Sharif in the Indian design is justified as also the visit of Jindal to Nawaz Sharif.The fact is that after the ICJ decision Pakistan National Security issue of Kulbushahn has been compromised.

Govardhan Bhure
May 19, 2017 11:30am

Pakistan ,You have lost all battles in various platform .Please, Now onward behave logically and technically

SYED H
May 19, 2017 11:30am

@ANDY “I am astonished that none of the Pakistani commentators has questioned the secret military court trial.”

@BK “So many legal luminaries, questioning the legal opinion of ICJ. But none questioning the functioning of military courts- trying civilians in a democratic country! Really wierd legal luminaries.”

Are you also “astonished” that people in India including its “legal luminaires” have not questioned how thousands of Kashmiris are killed without trial for decades because India has imposed laws on Kashmir that give its security personnel the right to do this, and “disappear”, rape, torture and much else with impunity?

Jsmkumar
May 19, 2017 11:32am

Transparency is what world expects regarding human rights.Total justice runs on the principle "many criminals may go unpunished or escape , but you should not punish one single innocent ".

KhWarizMi
May 19, 2017 11:33am

I am 100% sure in my mind that Nawaz Sharif is on Kulboshan Yadev's side. Had Indians captured a serving Pakistani naval commander incharge of terror bombings then their PM and foreign office would have talked about it day in and day out in all international forums.

Khan
May 19, 2017 11:36am

Its vital for the foreign ministry to look within, how ironic is that it does'nt have any well versed attorney n expert on its payroll in the "International Law". March 29, 2017 (what we understood via tv talk show's) was/is clearly shows foreign ministry pathatic knowledge of International Law and/or foreign ministry experts, who are over paid n under worked.

Li-En-Ja
May 19, 2017 11:36am

All so called lawyers are saying what feel good to hear. No one is actually helping Pakistan to critically examine the position. Only Asma Jahangir's seems quote has some weight to consider. First of all we must stop to see this judgement as final verdict. Its an temporary order asking Pakistan to stop the execution till ICJ gives final decision. Pakistan had already said that after the Military Court order what are option available before KJ. ICJ asked both parties to explain the position and submit the commendable evidences. Military court does not work like a civilian court and can pass judgement without having substantial evidences. It basically depends on the prudence of the Judge. The point of worry is our Foreign Advisor has already depose before senate that We don't have substantial evidence against KJ. So Pakistan now has to work hard to prove with concrete evidence to accuse KJ. There is a difference between submitting a dossier of involvement and evidence before court.

hemraj jain
May 19, 2017 11:36am

Sub:- ICJ order is in favor of Pakistan

---- India (not withstanding hullaballoo being made in Indian media by jingoist Indians on so-called victory of India in May, 18 ICJ order) by filing an ill-drafted petition in ICJ and the ICJ by giving half-cooked May, 18 order where there is no order for consular access (before any appeal or mercy appeal by Jadhav in SCP and with PoP) have created a situation where it can only invite ridicule on ICJ when it would hear Indian petition on merit in August, 2017 as mentioned at:-

http://www.alwihdainfo.com/Ill-drafted-petition-and-half-cooked-May-18-order-has-created-insurmountable-legal-problems-for-ICJ_a54471.html

SYED H
May 19, 2017 11:36am

@Shahid That Jadhav has 2 passports and 2 identities with different names is a fact that does not require consular access for India to confirm; it is undeniable. There are 2 passport serial numbers which exist and are publicly known, as well as the fact that Jadhav had been renting a flat from his mother in Mumbai using one of his Muslim identities, again publicly known. India has refused to explain this (but not denied this). Please look at the Karan Thapar article in the Indian Express titled "The Mysterious Mr Jadhav" to read how the Indian Express tried to pursue this using both the passport numbers (mentioned in full in the article), but the Indian External Affairs Ministry stonewalled and refused to provide its records for those numbers which would have clarified the matter.

N.S
May 19, 2017 11:42am

ICJ is a European institution mostly and earlier has shot down many execution orders as in Europe capital punishment or execution is considered as against the human rights and it is not allowed. One reason for granting stay on execution here. This is another thing that US went with the execution in three cases which was stayed by the court.

Also ICJ jurisdiction here has its limitations, and Pakistan can cite the national interest issue, and simply ignore the ICJ decision just many countries did earlier.

Asit Ghosh
May 19, 2017 11:42am

Retired Justice Wajihud­din Ahmed also termed the ICJ order “poor”. An unanimous decision by a 11 member bench is "poor" as per this retired judge What luck he is retired.

Zak
May 19, 2017 11:43am

Pakistan should withdraw from the ICJ and carry out the sentence immediately. A clear message should go to india, no one can save them. Do it.

Zak
May 19, 2017 11:46am

Pakistan should now represent the case where indian planes intruded into pakistan airspace and shot down unarmed navy reconnaissance plane killng 9 staff. Pakistan took case to ICJ, who ruled they had no jurisdiction as it was bilateral matter. Reopen that and kashmir resolution bringing in stark facts about IOK. Do it. Hire a competent team. We seem to lack ace quality.

N.S
May 19, 2017 11:49am

@LS The second passport with the name of Hussain Mubarak Patel was given to Jadhav by the government of India, the passport was real the name was fake and with anew ID. More reasons to believe he was a spy and on a espionage mission.

John
May 19, 2017 11:50am

This is not about winning or losing. It is about the life of a person. If he is a spy and was involved in terrorist activities as the Pakistani Military says, he should be punished according to the law of the country. It is an opportunity for Pakistan to show the whole world with sustainable proof about the Indian terror activities inside Pakistan. However, the confession video can't be considered as a proof and the judgment of Pakistani Military court also can't be seen as transparent or justifiable, considering the animosity exists between the Pakistani military (of course not the people) and India. Care should be taken in preparing this proof, and it should be prepared by Professionals. The normal dossiers which Mr. Sarjat Aziz providing to the UN against India is poor in quality and substance that the UN just ignores it. The ICJ is a serious body where lousy proof and just words will not bring the desired result, instead solid proof is required to show the person is guilty.

RAHAT
May 19, 2017 11:56am

I never understood how can a country unable to produce a single evidence before declaring killing order of other country's citizen? Having no evidence itself makes the case weak.

ERZINGA
May 19, 2017 11:58am

@lafanga Please do not confuse issues and get carried away with emotion. The ICJ hearing was not about the passport he carried or his nationality which India is not denying. The issue was his access to Counselor services which is a Human Rights issue. So try to understand what this discussion is all about. Next, try him in civilain court and hang him if you can prove beyond a shadow of doubt that he was indeed acting on behalf of RAW and actively participating in subversive activities against the State. That will be almost impossible to prove as Sartaj Aziz himself is on record saying there is not enough evidence. But military courts have no locus standi in the civilized world outside war zones.

Raunak
May 19, 2017 11:59am

@N.S .. Have you seen the passport in person.. Anybody can make a Pakistani passport sitting anywhere in the world, does that mean Pakistan government is involved

Raunak
May 19, 2017 12:00pm

@Zak .. Only the last line of yours has some substance in it

Raunak
May 19, 2017 12:00pm

@Zak .. Do it man, IF YOU CAN

Ravindran Achuthan
May 19, 2017 12:12pm

@Mahmud Your case was not strong. That is the consummate answer. Period

Muhammad Ismail
May 19, 2017 12:19pm

Mr. Khokhar's statement is logical. If India is worried about kulbhushin we are worried about thousands of Kashmirs. This will be insult of justice and ICJ if Jadhve is free who committed crime and innocent Kashmirs face the brutality of Indian forces.

yousaf jamal akhtar
May 19, 2017 12:26pm

save money at least , how much is this costing us and how much are these so called experts and lawyers demanding, is it not better to let him go and strike a moral victory, sometimes the best shots are the ones you let go .

R S Chakravarti
May 19, 2017 12:30pm

@Asad Baig Especially when they give excuses like national security for not providing proof.

Sameer
May 19, 2017 12:31pm

Kudos to Dawn for bringing such logic to light.

haris
May 19, 2017 12:41pm

@Raj : Spy agents do not fall under the jurisdiction of civilian courts. Neither in Pakistan nor in India.

Muneer
May 19, 2017 03:57pm

@ERZINGA why should a retrial be carried out by Pakistan.As per the law Kulbushahn can lodge an appeal in the High Court and also in the Supreme Court.He can avail both these recourse if he thinks himself to be innocent.

Adil Jadoon
May 19, 2017 04:37pm

We should our PM this question...

Adil Jadoon
May 19, 2017 04:40pm

So many experts in international law......wonder what sort of cases theey have dealing with.

Faheem ferdous
May 19, 2017 06:05pm

@Joe it would be so bad in morals and ethics to have withdrawn from its jurisdiction. Pakistan can use the same platform against India . India has been avoiding pak on all occasions by citing n no of excuses. when cornered by other countries India has always been citing shimla agreement and tells them to stay away, and when pak asks for a dialogue they say no and when Kashmiris ask them to talk they say you have no locus standi . so need of the hour is to start a big chain of litigation against India at ICJ to beat them at their own choosing

Tom
May 20, 2017 04:01pm

@Asad Baig : No merit for international Law, they lost because pakistan can't influence the world?????????? Are you crazy?

anis
May 20, 2017 05:32pm

Folks ...show a big heart of Pakistan to India this time. People in the know are well aware that how Kulbhushan Jhadav is. Hatred, allegations & counter allegations would lead to anywhere conclusively. Both the countries have their own internal far more important issues to handle..right from Medical care to Education, Law & order to Employment,...et al. So go ahead...and be a brave heart and overturned all the speculations and release him by handing over to Indian Authorities. I'm pretty sure it would start a new chapter in developing & bettering relationship with neighbor.

Lootra
May 21, 2017 05:28am

Yes, Pakistani lawyers are more talented than the ICJ.....but then they should have used that talent to shape the outcome over the lesser qualified legal professionals of the ICJ.

aditya
May 21, 2017 08:04am

preparing working at it is alien to Pakistan. easier to whine point deny and blame. comes from being a welfare state living on foreign alms for decades and incapable of even picking up their own trash.

Abdulla Hussain
May 21, 2017 01:27pm

"Experts wonder why ICJ jurisdiction was recognized in March"

Very simple, the baby was to born in May so pre birth arrangement was necessary, Nawaz Sharif government took Pakistan to ride.

Must read