India, Pakistan exchange prisoner lists; New Delhi seeks early release of 159 Indians, consular access for 26 others
The exchange was done out through diplomatic channels in New Delhi and Islamabad, as part of the 2008 Agreement on Consular Access — one of the few functional bilateral mechanisms still in place between the two countries.
Under the pact, both sides share prisoner data twice a year, on January 1 and July 1. Another operational mechanism is the annual exchange of lists of nuclear installations, held every January 1 to prevent attacks on such facilities during hostilities.
India submitted details of 382 civilian prisoners and 81 fishermen believed to be Pakistani. Pakistan, in turn, listed 53 civilian prisoners and 193 fishermen believed to be Indian. In a statement, External Affairs Ministry said India has called for the 'early release and repatriation' of Indian civilian prisoners, fishermen along with their boats and missing defence personnel held in Pakistani custody.
New Delhi pressed Islamabad to speed up the repatriation of 159 prisoners and fishermen who have completed their jail terms, and to immediately provide consular access to 26 others believed to be Indian, but who have not yet received access.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Russian sanctions bill: US planning to impose 500 per cent tariffs on nations trading with Moscow- How will this impact India?
The United States is planning to impose a 500 per cent tariff on the products of those countries that are still doing trade with Russia. In an interview with ABC News, Senator Lindsey Graham said that he wanted the US to impose tariffs to stop them from supporting Vladimir Putin's war machine. Moscow launched full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago on February 24, 2022. "Big breakthrough here. So what does this bill do? If you're buying products from Russia and you're not helping Ukraine, then there's a 500 percent tariff on your products coming into the United States. India and China buy 70 percent of Putin's oil. They keep his war machine going. My bill has 84 co-sponsors. It would allow the president to put tariffs on China and India and other countries to get them -- stop them from supporting Putin's war machine, to get him to the table. For the first time yesterday, the president told me," Graham said. How this will impact India? India has elevated Russia to its primary oil supplier following a substantial increase in Russian crude oil imports in June, exceeding the combined purchases from prominent Gulf suppliers including Saudi Arabia and Iraq. The previous month's imports from Russia stood at 1.96 million barrels per day (bpd). The potential implementation of the US bill could result in extensive 500 per cent tariffs on Indian goods entering America. Nevertheless, India is currently negotiating a trade agreement with the US, which is anticipated to significantly reduce US tariffs on Indian products.
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
India's push for zero tariff on labour-intensive exports is combination of economic strategy & domestic politics: GTRI
India is pushing hard for full tariff elimination on labour-intensive exports like garments, footwear, carpets, and leather goods in the final phase of Free Trade Agreement (FTA) talks with the U.S. Without duty-free access, India fears the deal will be politically unsellable. Current U.S. tariffs remain high, and Washington is resisting full reciprocity, raising concerns of an imbalanced deal. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads As negotiations for a long-anticipated Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between India and the United States enter their final stretch, India is making a last-minute, high-stakes push for full tariff elimination on its labour-intensive to Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), without duty-free access for sectors like garments, footwear, carpets, and leather goods, the deal could become politically unsellable at home. India's insistence is rooted in a combination of economic strategy and domestic political labour-intensive sectors--dominated by small and medium enterprises and providing critical employment across states like Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, and West Bengal--contributed over USD 14.3 billion to India's exports to the U.S. in on these goods currently range between 8 per cent and 20 per cent, especially high for garments and footwear, putting Indian exporters at a steep disadvantage in the American India has offered to reduce its Most Favoured Nation (MFN) duties on US goods as part of the deal, Washington appears unwilling to says the US is not ready to scrap either its high MFN tariffs or the country-specific duties that currently stand at 26 per cent, proposing instead a limited reduction to 10 per cent--still a significant surcharge that could negate any meaningful market access for Indian imbalance has raised concerns in India that the FTA, if signed under the current terms, would disproportionately favour American to the tension is the U.S. Congress's lack of fast-track trade authority, which limits Washington's ability to offer broad tariff broader export profile to the U.S. in FY2025 stood at USD 86.5 billion, up 11.6 per cent from the previous year. Of this, medium labour-intensity sectors--such as electronics, chemicals, automobiles, and jewellery--accounted for USD 44.6 exports face moderate U.S. tariffs of 2 per cent to 5 per cent, with some exceptions reaching 7 per cent. Meanwhile, low labour-intensity exports, such as pharmaceuticals and heavy machinery, totalling USD 17.3 billion, already benefit from minimal tariffs below 2 per cent and are not central to India's position is that full tariff elimination is essential not only for equitable trade but also for social goals like employment generation, MSME empowerment, and increased economic participation by negotiators caution that if Washington insists on retaining high tariffs while India cuts its own, the deal risks being perceived as "lopsided and politically untenable."
Hans India
41 minutes ago
- Hans India
Quad Nations Demand Justice For Pahalgam Terror Attack
The Quad alliance has demanded swift justice for those responsible for the devastating Pahalgam terror attack, calling upon the international community to support efforts in bringing the culprits to account. Foreign Ministers from the four-nation partnership strongly denounced the April 22 incident that resulted in 26 fatalities and emphasized the urgent need for decisive action against terrorism that crosses international borders. Notably absent from their collective statement was any direct reference to Pakistan or the subsequent four-day armed confrontation between Indian and Pakistani forces that occurred in May. The diplomatic gathering took place in Washington D.C. on Tuesday, July 1, 2025, bringing together India's External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Australia's Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Japan's Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya. The Quad representatives expressed their "strongest condemnation" of the terrorist incident in Pahalgam, which resulted in the deaths of 25 Indian citizens and one Nepali national, while leaving numerous others wounded. The Ministers conveyed their profound sympathy to the bereaved families and expressed hopes for the complete recovery of those who sustained injuries in the attack. They issued a clear demand for accountability, stating that those who planned, executed, and funded this heinous act must face justice immediately. The alliance called upon all United Nations member countries to fulfill their international legal obligations and cooperate fully with relevant authorities in accordance with UN Security Council directives. Beyond addressing the terror attack, the Quad meeting revealed plans to establish a Ports of the Future partnership initiative in Mumbai during 2025. The Ministers also voiced significant concerns regarding tensions in the East China Sea and South China Sea regions. They reaffirmed their collective stance against any unilateral military actions intended to alter existing territorial arrangements through force or intimidation, in an apparent reference to China's expanding military presence in these disputed waters.
