A CURSORY look at post-verdict India reflects that the whole country, top-down from the prime minister to the gullible Indian in Jhadav’s village Javli (Maharashtra) considers the judgment a ‘victory’.

India is overjoyed that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) entertained its application. But the fact is that Pakistan’s gentleman judge Tassaduq Hussain Jillani (a life-long crusader for human rights) also concurred with ICJ’s jurisdiction.

India’s pleader Harish Salve, however, stayed immune from mainstream frenzy. At post-verdict press conference, he admitted that the military court’s judgment has not been overturned. He said: “Pakistan is now bound to give Jadhav a fair trial irrespective of the trial being held in a military court.” He added: “if Pakistan still fails to give him a fair trial, we can always go back to ICJ.”

India Today in its July 17 issue echoed a similar opinion. It reported though India succeeded in securing a stay on the death sentence of Kulbhushan Jadhav, its argument to annul the military court verdict was not accepted. The ICJ ruled it is not the conviction and sentence of Jadhav which are to be regarded as a violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. Thus, the court finds that these submissions made by India cannot be upheld, says the ICJ judgment.

The verdict is a signature victory confirming India’s ‘espionage and terrorism’ against Pakistan documented in RAW’s officer B. Raman’s book The Kaoboys & R&AW: Down Memory Lane and another RAW officer, R.K Yadav’s letter dated Aug 14, 2015, published in Indian and Nepalese media.

Pakistan understood abhorrence of some judges to military courts and expected an order for a civil trial. Yet the international court, thanks to Khawar Qureshi’s advocacy, did not fetter the military court’s jurisdiction.

The court did not absolve Jadhav of charge of being a spy or saboteur. It confirmed that he was an Indian national despite having passports in multiple names.

At least ‘independent’ Indian media should not toe the Indian official line.

D. Malik
Rawalpindi

(2)

THE verdict by the ICJ is an endorsement of Pakistan’s stance on the dreadful activities of the Indian spy. As Pakistan is celebrating victory it is time to consider the weaknesses that should have been removed at the beginning of the case.

Ad hoc judge Tassaduq Hussain Jillani’s dissenting note that the Vienna Convention was not applicable to spies is an emblem of justice. The note reads: “The makers of the convention would not have imagined that it would be applied to spies someday. India is taking undue advantage of its rights.”

This should serve as an eye-opener for India and it should stop supporting terrorism through its forces and making a hue and cry against Pakistan. It should look into the mirror and not through the glass. Its state terrorism has gone to unprecedented level in India-occupied Kashmir. International media should unveil the ugly face of Indian terrorism.

The ICJ verdict will provide some solace to those who lost their near and dear ones in bomb blasts and other heinous acts of terrorism committed by India in Pakistan.

Iftikhar Mirza
Islamabad

Published in Dawn, July 23rd, 2019