India ‘categorically rejects' Court of Arbitration's ‘supplemental award' on Kishenganga, Ratle hydropower projects
India on Friday (June 27, 2025) 'categorically rejected' the 'supplemental award' by the Court of Arbitration on Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, saying that it 'never recognised' the Court of Arbitration, which is a 'serious breach' of the Indus Waters Treaty which has been put 'at abeyance' after the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam.
'India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void,' said the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) after the World Bank's Court of Arbitration gave a 'supplemental award' on Kishenganga and Ratle projects in Jammu and Kashmir.
'Unilateral action'
Pakistan had been raising objections regarding the design of Kishenganga-Ratle power projects in Jammu and Kashmir, and the two sides held multiple rounds of discussions to deal with Pakistan's concerns till 2015. In 2016, Pakistan approached the World Bank to establish a Court of Arbitration to resolve these technical disputes. Pakistan took three issues concerning Kishenganga and four for the Ratle hydropower project to the Court of Arbitration. India's position from the beginning regarding this Court of Arbitration was that it was a 'unilateral action' by Pakistan to approach the World Bank.
Reflecting that position, the MEA said on Friday, 'Today, the illegal Court of Arbitration, purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, albeit in brazen violation of it, has issued what it characterises as a 'supplemental award' on its competence concerning the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.'
The MEA reminded that after the Pahalgam terror attack, India has exercised 'its rights as a sovereign nation under international law' and placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, 'until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism.' The MEA described the Court of Arbitration's latest declarations as a 'charade at Pakistan's behest'.
'Until such time that the Treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the Treaty. No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body, which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign,' said the MEA, while dismissing the Court of Arbitration's 'supplemental award'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
Prices, like water, will find their own level. Controls breed vested interests: Minoo Masani
You cannot defeat the law of supply and demand. Prices, like water, will find their own level, and no amount of juggling will stop the laws of hydrodynamics or the laws of economics from having play. And that is why the team of the World Bank which visited India in February or March this year—let me remind the House that the World Bank is our biggest foreign benefactor today, generous, friendly and helpful—singled out for particular castigation Government's present policies, which in its opinion make for inefficiency and high costs, and controls which hamper industry at every turn. Two days ago, I read that the L.K. Jha Committee having failed to stop the rise in prices, the matter will now be referred to a committee at a higher level of Cabinet Ministers, as if the level of the committee decides whether controls would be effective or not! Suppose the Ministers' committee fails, where are you going any higher? Who is going to form the next committee to stop prices rising if the committee of three Cabinet Ministers fails where Mr Jha and his colleagues have failed? Controls are the main bane of our economy. It is said we should stop prices rising by putting on controls. If I may say so, that is flying in the face of the laws of economics. Nothing can stop prices rising if the supply and demand position warrants it. A British economist has said that to try to stop prices by controls is like a lady going to a surgeon to remove her double chin, and the thing comes out at the back of her neck in a bump! In other words, you treat a symptom, you do not treat the disease. The disease of inflation is due to the policies pursued by the Government. Until these are changed, no controls are going to succeed. Also read: For Minoo Masani, Indira Gandhi's bank nationalisation Bill 'came in the dark, like a thief' What is a control? A control is giving an official, even a small one, the power of life and death over a peasant, a shopkeeper or a businessman. Human nature being what it is, is it a matter for surprise that our public life is now riddled with corruption? I am not putting on any cloak of moral superiority. We are all the same under the skin, whatever party we may belong to. But the danger is that, when you combine economic and political power in the same hands, you are creating opportunities for corruption that should not be created. I would not entrust anybody, including my own party, with the unlimited power that you give to the bureaucracy and politicians to exercise controls. I would recognize that human nature being what it is, there must be checks and balances, a division of power. Why do we have a division of power between the judiciary, executive and the legislature? Similarly, we must have a division of authority, political and economic. The day on which you give economic power to those with police power, you have surrendered the liberties of the people, and that is what state capitalism as practised by the present Government means. Also read: Minoo Masani is India's forgotten liberal who went against Nehru's all-pervasive socialism Controls involve bureaucracy. Let me give you a few findings of the studies made by the Organization and Methods Division of the Government itself. Official files in the Union Ministries increase at an annual rate of three lakhs; 21 lakhs of files are awaiting screening and destruction; 22 to 45 per cent of the working space allotted to the staff on an austerity basis is occupied by undisposed files. In the Central Public Works Department, 18 to 25 months are needed for a proposal to reach the stage of execution. And in that particular Ministry the study cites the case of the Land and Development Office where the allotment of a piece of land involves no less than 370 steps from the beginning till the end. This is the controlled economy. I was very glad that my friend, the Minister for Steel and Heavy Industries, speaking at a seminar in Delhi on August 6, confessed that we are now over-regulated, and he has stated that our framework of detailed control needs alteration, and the multiplicity of points at which they operate needs to be reduced. I am quoting him now: 'It is a painful but inexorable fact that today an industrial manager spends more time getting across or around controls than in the task of management.' This is a very laudable discovery, however belated it may be, but the removal of controls is not so easy. The Minister for Steel has already found that out in his very laudable desire or attempt, which has so far failed, to decontrol steel. That is because every control breeds a new vested interest. Vested interests on the business and official side creep up which resist the abolition of the control, and it needs a very stout heart and great guts, like the late Mr Kidwai, to scrap the whole lot and go back from control to decontrol as Mahatma Gandhi advised. This essay is part of a series from the Indian Liberals archive, a project of the Centre for Civil Society. This essay first appeared in the book 'Congress Misrule and the Swatantra Alternative', published in November 1966. The original version can be accessed on this link.
Scroll.in
2 hours ago
- Scroll.in
India rejects arbitration court's ‘ruling' on Kishanganga, Ratle power projects
India on Friday rejected the so-called supplemental award by the Court of Arbitration on the Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects in Jammu and Kashmir, saying it had never recognised the court's authority. India's position 'has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void', said the Ministry of External Affairs. In a ruling on Thursday, the Court of Arbitration in The Hague said that India holding the treaty in abeyance ' does not deprive the Court of Arbitration of competence' and can therefore continue hearing the matter. The court was considering the impact of India's decision to suspend the treaty on the proceedings. In April, New Delhi had held the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance following the Pahalgam terrorist attack until Pakistan 'credibly and irrevocably' ends its support for cross-border terrorism. India has not participated in the proceedings and has rejected all previous rulings of the court on the matter. India and Pakistan signed the Indus Waters Treaty in 1960 with the World Bank as an additional signatory. The pact sought to divide the water of the Indus river and its tributaries equitably among the two countries. Under the treaty, water from three eastern rivers, Beas, Ravi and Sutlej, was allocated to India and that from the three western rivers – Chenab, Indus and Jhelum – to Pakistan. The treaty also permitted both countries to use the other's rivers for certain purposes, such as small hydroelectric projects that require little or no water storage. On Friday, the external affairs ministry said that 'until such time that the treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the treaty'. It added: 'No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign.' 'This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicentre of terrorism,' the ministry said. 'Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums.' The dispute While the treaty had largely ensured peace over water sharing, there has been a long-standing dispute over the Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects. The Kishanganga project, in Jammu and Kashmir's Bandipora district across the Kishanganga river, which is a tributary of the Jhelum river, was inaugurated in 2018. The Ratle project, over the Chenab river in Kishtwar district, is under construction. Pakistan has raised concerns about the design of the Indian dams, meant for power generation, which it claims will obstruct the flow of the rivers that provide water for 80% of its irrigated crops, thereby accusing India of violating the treaty. India has rejected the claims. Islamabad had taken the matter related to the court of arbitration in 2016 even though India had agreed to the neutral expert mechanism. India argued that having two parallel dispute resolution processes – arbitration court and the neutral expert – was not in line with the treaty.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Visa requests be treated on merit: India on US's social media directive
The government has said it believes all US visa applications by Indian nationals should be treated on the basis of merit. The Ministry of External Affairs made the remarks on Thursday in response to US Embassy releasing guidelines requiring visa applicants to provide details of their social media identifiers. Those applying for an F, M, or J non-immigrant visa in the US are now required to switch the settings of their social media handles to "public". While the government noted that immigration matters pertain to the sovereign functions of a country, it also urged that the visa applications of Indians be judged on the basis of merit. "Visa and immigration matters pertain to sovereign functions of any country. But, we have seen the guidelines issued by the US Embassy, providing details of social media identifiers in visa applications," MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said. The MEA spokesperson also assured that India was trying to safeguard interests of its nationals and was in touch with the US on consular issues. What's the new US visa rule? Those applying for an F, M, or J non-immigrant visa in the US are now required to switch the settings of their social media handles to "public" so they could be screened. The F or M category is for student visas and J category for exchange visitor visa. Applicants are also mandated to list all social media usernames of every platform they have used from the last five years on the DS-160 visa application form. According to the US embassy, social media vetting is necessary to establish the applicants' identity and admissibility to the US under law. If applicants fail to provide the social media information, it could lead to visa denial and ineligibility for future visas. Visa applicants have been asked to provide "social media identifiers" on immigrant and non-immigrant visa application forms since 2019, the embassy clarified. The new guidelines come in the wake of US President Donald Trump's intensified immigration crackdown. Immigration laws have been tightened in the US, and those entering the country illegally would face jail time and deportation. The intensified immigration move recently led to protests in Los Angeles against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.
