Latest news with #Kishenganga
Mint
an hour ago
- Politics
- Mint
India rejects Hague court's ‘illegal' ruling on J&K hydroelectric projects: 'Charade at Pakistan's behest'
India on Friday firmly rejected a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague concerning two hydroelectric projects—Kishenganga and Ratle—located in Jammu and Kashmir. In a statement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) dismissed the decision as a 'so-called supplemental award,' stating that India has never accepted the framework under which this arbitration was conducted. The MEA noted that India does not recognise the jurisdiction of the court in this matter, especially regarding dispute resolution mechanisms involving Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty. In its ruling, the Court of Arbitration said India's decision in April to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance 'does not limit' its competence over the dispute and that its ruling is binding on the parties. 'This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism,' the MEA said. 'Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums,' it said in a statement. India has never recognised the proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration after Pakistan raised objections to certain design elements of the two projects under the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty. 'Today, the illegal Court of Arbitration, purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, albeit in brazen violation of it, has issued what it characterizes 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 said. 'India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration,' it said. The MEA said 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 illegal for that reason. A day after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, India took a series of punitive measures against Pakistan that included putting the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 in 'abeyance'. 'Following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India has in exercise of its rights as a sovereign nation under international law, placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism,' the MEA said. 'Until such time that the treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the treaty,' it said. '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,' it added. This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism. India has never recognized the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration. India, therefore, categorically rejects this so-called supplemental award as it has rejected all prior pronouncements of this body, it said.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 hours ago
- Politics
- First Post
India calls Court of Arbitration on Indus Waters Treaty 'illegal', rejects its ruling on J&K dam projects
The MEA said 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 illegal for that reason read more India on Friday strongly rejected a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague over two hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir, saying it has never recognised the so-called framework for dispute resolution with Pakistan. India rejects this so-called 'supplemental award', the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said, referring to the ruling in the case related to Pakistan's objections to Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects. In its ruling, the Court of Arbitration said India's decision in April to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance 'does not limit' its competence over the dispute and that its ruling is binding on the parties. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'This latest charade at Pakistan's behest is yet another desperate attempt by it to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism,' the MEA said. 'Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums,' it said in a statement. India has never recognised the proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration after Pakistan raised objections to certain design elements of the two projects under the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty. 'Today, the illegal Court of Arbitration, purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, albeit in brazen violation of it, has issued what it characterizes 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 said. 'India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration,' it said. The MEA said 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 illegal for that reason. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A day after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, India took a series of punitive measures against Pakistan that included putting the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 in 'abeyance'. 'Following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India has in exercise of its rights as a sovereign nation under international law, placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism,' the MEA said. 'Until such time that the treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the treaty,' it said. '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,' it added. India, therefore, categorically rejects this so-called supplemental award as it has rejected all prior pronouncements of this body, it said.
Express Tribune
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Arbitration court vindicates Pakistan's IWT stance
The Court of Arbitration constituted in accordance with the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, ruled on Friday that India's decision of holding the treaty in abeyance did not deprive it of its competence to adjudicate Pakistan's complaints against its neighbour. The court issued the 'Supplemental Award' on the proceedings instituted by Pakistan against India. 'Consistent with this interpretation of the Treaty, the Court has previously found that once a proceeding before a court of arbitration is properly initiated, as in the present case, there must be a strong presumption against the incidental loss of jurisdiction over the matters placed before it by subsequent acts, such as the appointment of a neutral expert. Accordingly, the text of the Treaty, read in light of its object and purpose, does not to allow either party, acting unilaterally, to hold in abeyance or suspend an ongoing dispute settlement process,' the order read. The Supplemental Award said that 'the text… does not provide for the unilateral 'abeyance' or 'suspension' of the Treaty. Rather, the Treaty provides for its continuation in force until terminated by mutual consent by India and Pakistan'. 'Such text definitively indicates an intent by the drafters not to allow for unilateral action to alter the rights, obligations, and procedures established by the Treaty, including the treaty's dispute settlement procedures. Additionally, the object and purpose of the Treaty, as expressed in its Preamble, includes establishing procedures for the resolution of all such questions as may hereafter arise in regard to the interpretation or application of the provisions agreed upon in the Treaty,' it said. The order added, 'To that end, the Treaty's procedures, inter alia, call for the establishment of a court of arbitration at the request of one of the parties, and provide that such court of arbitration, after receiving written and oral submissions, is empowered to render an award or awards that 'shall be final and binding upon the Parties with respect to that dispute.' 'It is difficult to see how this object and purpose of the Treaty—compulsory dispute resolution for definitive resolution of disputes arising between the Parties—could possibly be achieved if it were open to either Party, acting unilaterally, to suspend an ongoing dispute settlement process. Such an interpretation would fundamentally undermine 'the value and efficacy of the Treaty's compulsory third-party dispute settlement process'. Through a request for arbitration on August 19, 2016, Pakistan initiated the arbitration proceedings against India, seeking to resolve certain issues concerning the design or operation of run-of-river hydro-electric plants on the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers and their tributaries. The plants included the Kishenganga Hydro-Electric Plant and the Ratle Hydro-Electric Plant. After the filing of Pakistan's request for arbitration, India requested for the appointment of a neutral expert to resolve certain design and operation questions concerning the two projects. On October 13, 2022, the World Bank, which had brokered the IWT 65 years ago, appointed Michel Lino as a neutral expert pursuant to Article IX and Annexure F to the treaty. In April 2025, after the Pahalgam attack, India said it was holding the IWT in abeyance as a punitive measure against Pakistan. "The Court of Arbitration unanimously finds: A) India's position that it is holding the Treaty in 'abeyance', however, that position may be characterized as a matter of international law, does not deprive the Court of Arbitration of competence," the ruling said. "B) finds that the Court of Arbitration has a continuing responsibility to advance its proceedings in a timely, efficient, and fair manner without regard to India's position on 'abeyance', and that a failure to do so would be inconsistent with its obligations under the Treaty," it added. 'C) DETERMINES that the above findings apply, mutatis mutandis, with respect to any competence that the Neutral Expert otherwise possesses. D) RESERVES for further consideration and directions all issues not decided in this Award.' The Court of Arbitration is led by Prof Sean D Murphy and included Prof Wouter Buytaert, Prof Jeffrey P Minear, Judge Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh and Dr Donald Blackmore. It said that according to IWT, technical questions could be placed before a neutral expert or an arbitral panel. Pakistan, meanwhile, welcomed the Supplemental Award, noting that the Court affirmed its competence in the light of recent developments and that India's unilateral action could not deprive either the Court or the neutral expert to adjudicate the issues before them. 'Pakistan looks forward to receiving the Court's Award on the First Phase on the Merits in due course following the hearing that was held in Peace Palace in The Hague in July 2024,' said an official handout issued after the ruling was published on the court's website. 'The high priority, at this point, is that India and Pakistan find a way back to a meaningful dialogue, including on the application of the Indus Waters Treaty,' it said. It referred Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's remarks this week that Pakistan was 'ready to engage in a meaningful dialogue with India'.
Indian Express
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Indus Waters Treaty: India rejects ‘illegal' arbitration court's authority, calls it ‘charade' at Pak behest
India on Friday rejected the authority of an arbitration court 'illegally' formed under the Indus Waters Treaty after the body issued a 'supplemental award' on its competence to hear cases on the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu & Kashmir. The Indian government has consistently opposed the proceedings of The Hague-based Court of Arbitration ever since its constitution by the World Bank in October 2022. In a statement Friday, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) termed the move as the 'latest charade at Pakistan's behest' and said that this is an attempt by Islamabad to escape accountability for its role as the global epicentre of terrorism. '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 an MEA statement. The Court of Arbitration had said Thursday that India's position of holding the treaty in abeyance 'does not deprive the Court of Arbitration of competence'. India is constructing the Kishenganga project on the Kishenganga river, a tributary of the Jhelum, and the Ratle project on the Chenab river. In 2015, Pakistan objected to their design features and moved the World Bank to seek a settlement through a neutral expert. But it withdrew its request a year later and asked for adjudication through a Court of Arbitration instead. India, for its part, sought a neutral expert to rule on the differences. On October 13, 2022, the World Bank appointed Michal Lino as the neutral expert. The same day, it also appointed a Court of Arbitration. India has opposed the court since then, saying it could not be 'compelled to recognise illegal and parallel proceedings not envisaged by the Treaty'. India has continued participating in the 'Treaty-consistent Neutral Expert proceedings'. The MEA statement on Friday said: 'Following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India has in exercise of its rights as a sovereign nation under international law, placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism. 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.' The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on September 19, 1960, after nine years of negotiations between India and Pakistan. Then Indian Prime Minister Pt Jawaharlal Nehru and then Pakistani President Mohammed Ayub Khan signed the treaty in Karachi. The treaty has 12 Articles and 8 Annexures (from A to H). As per the provisions of the treaty, all the water of 'Eastern Rivers'— Sutlej, Beas and Ravi—shall be available for the 'unrestricted use' of India. However, Pakistan shall receive water from 'Western Rivers'—Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. In January 2023, India had issued a notice to Pakistan seeking the 'modification' of the Treaty. This was the first such notice in the more than six decades of the Treaty's existence. India upped the ante in September 2024, by issuing Islamabad another formal notice, this time seeking the 'review and modification' of the IWT. The word 'review', according to experts, effectively signals New Delhi's intent to revoke, and renegotiate the Treaty which will turn 65 this year. India decided to keep in abeyance the IWT on April 23 Pahalgam terror attack, in which militants killed at least 26 people and injured another 10.
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
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'.
