Time for ICAO to reclaim PoK airspace and hand it over to India

Time of India

25-05-2025

Capt. Amit Singh is an aviation professional with over 35 years of experience in commercial airlines, including pivotal roles in three startup airlines, where he developed systems for efficient, low-cost, and profitable operations. A leader in flight operations, safety, and pilot training, he channels his expertise into writing insightful articles on aviation, history, and strategic thinking. Capt. Singh is a sought-after speaker at international safety and training conferences, blending technical knowledge with a passion for storytelling and analysis. Additionally, he explores his creative side through painting, reflecting a well-rounded personality committed to growth and innovation. LESS ... MORE
Introduction: Fir vs sovereignty in the skies
The skies above Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) are a silent witness to a diplomatic and operational anomaly. While the region is legally part of India, Pakistan controls its airspace under the Lahore FIR, approved by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). This arrangement contradicts international law and undermines India's sovereign rights as per Article 1 of the Chicago Convention.
This blog explores why ICAO must reassign Flight Information Region (FIR) control over PoK to India, aligning global airspace governance with international legal principles and geopolitical realities.
Understanding ICAO FIR and airspace sovereignty
An FIR (Flight Information Region) is an airspace zone within which a state is responsible for air traffic services. ICAO allocates FIRs for operational convenience, but FIR allocation does not define sovereignty.
However, in practice, FIR control often:
Imparts legitimacy to the controlling authority.
to the controlling authority. Enables control over overflight permissions .
. Affects international aviation policy and airline routing.
India's sovereignty over Jammu & Kashmir, including PoK, is recognised through the Instrument of Accession (1947). The UN Security Council has consistently referred to the region as disputed, without recognising Pakistan's sovereignty over any part of it.
Current anomaly: Pakistan controls FIR over Indian territory
Despite India's legal claim, ICAO continues to allow Pakistan to:
Control air traffic over PoK via the Lahore FIR .
via the . Deny overflights to Indian aircraft across its own territory.
to Indian aircraft across its own territory. Use FIR control as a tool of geopolitical leverage (e.g., post-Balakot 2019 airspace closures).
This setup is a symbolic undermining of sovereignty and a practical aviation and safety risk.
Why ICAO must reorganise the FIR over PoK
1. Legal Sovereignty vs FIR Control
Article 1 of the Chicago Convention states:
'Every state has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory.'
India's legal claim is grounded in international law .
. FIR control should not contradict recognised territorial boundaries .
. Pakistan's FIR over PoK violates the spirit of ICAO's neutrality.
2. Safety and operational risk in conflict zones
Kashmir is a known conflict zone ; both countries maintain active military deployments.
; both countries maintain active military deployments. Pakistan has continuously unilaterally closed its airspace , affecting global air traffic.
, affecting global air traffic. Civil-military coordination in Pakistani-administered areas lacks transparency, increasing the risk to international aviation.
3. Misuse of airspace control
Pakistan often denies India overflight rights over PoK airspace. As per ICAO, closure of the airspace should not be selective.
over PoK airspace. As per ICAO, closure of the airspace should not be selective. Airlines are forced to reroute, increasing fuel burn, emissions, and cost .
. This violates the principles of peaceful overflight under Article 5 of the Chicago Convention.
Global examples: FIRs managed across borders
ICAO allows FIRs to extend beyond borders only under mutual agreement or when the neighbouring country lacks capacity. These examples reinforce that cross-border FIRs must be consensual and temporary.
a. Singapore FIR over southern Malaysia
Singapore manages Malaysian airspace near Johor.
Based on technical capabilities and Malaysian consent .
. Malaysia has raised sovereignty concerns, triggering renegotiation.
b. Bahrain FIR Over Qatar and Saudi Arabia
Bahrain controls parts of Qatari and eastern Saudi airspace .
. Qatar filed a case with ICAO, demanding FIR realignment. ICAO approved the creation of a Doha FIR, confirming that change is possible.
c. Senegal-Gambia
Senegal manages Gambian airspace through a formal ICAO agreement .
. Gambia consented due to infrastructure limitations.
d. Serbia-Kosovo FIR managed via EUROCONTROL
Despite Kosovo's partial recognition, the FIR was reassigned based on safety needs, not sovereignty status.
In contrast, India neither lacks capability nor has given Pakistan consent to manage the airspace over PoK.
India's rightful claim and ICAO's responsibility
India is a founding ICAO member and has one of Asia's most advanced air traffic systems. Pakistan has no operational reason to control the airspace over Indian land. FIR realignment is:
Legally justified
Technically feasible
Consistent with ICAO precedents
ICAO must act on its responsibility to maintain neutrality, legal alignment, and operational safety.
Conclusion: Restoring balance in international airspace governance
The FIR over Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir represents an outdated, unjust, and unsafe arrangement. It fails the test of international law, undermines India's sovereignty, and exposes civil aviation to geopolitical risk.
ICAO must correct this imbalance.
It must initiate a structured transition plan to reassign FIR responsibility to India for the airspace above its legally recognised territory. This move will:
Align global airspace with UN-recognised borders .
. Enhance regional aviation safety .
. Uphold the principle of sovereignty for all member states equally.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author's own.