ICJ’s verdict: Can Pakistan unmask India on global platform?

[GlobalVillageSpace]

ICJ’s verdict: Can Pakistan unmask India on the global platform?
Global Village Space |

Usman Ashraf Chattha |

The whole country seems to be in a state of despondency after ICJ called upon Pakistan to hold the execution of Kulbushan Jadhav till the final decision. There it, though, see a silver-lining in the interim order.

There are, at least, four positives for Pakistan from this verdict.

What has Pakistan gained from ICJ’s verdict?
ICJ verdict has helped in highlighting the whole matter at the world stage much to the delight of Pakistani opposition parties and public.

Firstly, through the case, India has maintained that Jadhav is an Indian citizen. This is a big gain for Pakistan because India has always been silent about Jadhav and had not said anything specific about him. India alleges that Kalbushan was present in Iran doing his business. He was picked up by the Pakistani security agencies from Iran and was brought over to Pakistan which Pakistan completely rejects. Moreover, this citizen is not an ordinary one, but one involved in terrorist activities in Pakistan and sabotaging the much-greeted CPEC.

Read more: Read the ICJ Verdict for yourselves

Secondly, this Jadhav affair has been internationalized, although PM and his aides have been reluctant to speak about the matter in an international arena. The opposition has always raised the fact that PM Nawaz has not mentioned Kalbushan at any international stage, whether it is UN General Assembly address or any other platform. This has been true because PM Nawaz has not been able to cash in from the matter and push India regarding the matter. So, ICJ verdict has helped in highlighting the whole matter at the world stage much to the delight of Pakistani opposition parties and public.

This is an opportunity for Pakistan to hit India very hard at the ICJ and is a great platform to fully expose India’s nefarious designs.

Thirdly, this case has helped Pakistan to present the case of Indian hand in terrorist activities and terror financing in Pakistan to the whole world. India has always refuted state-sponsorship of terrorism in Pakistan by making the counter allegations against Pakistan as being involved in state-sponsored terrorism in Indian occupied Kashmir. India has been actively involved in sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan and financing the insurgency in Baluchistan. Now is an excellent opportunity for Pakistan to show the world how India has conspired against Pakistan through Afghan land and show the real face of the largest democracy to the whole world.

Read full article:
ICJ’s verdict: Can Pakistan unmask India on the global platform?

 

[Banglar Bir]

International-ising Jadhav
Ikram Sehgal, May 19, 2017

This was a good week for Pakistan. First Modi made the faux pas of the decade by boycotting the China Summit on the “One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiatives, then India gave us an enormous platform for internationalizing human rights by going to the ICJ over the Kulbushan Jadhav matter. Arrested by security forces while entering Balochistan from Iran last year on March 23, Lt Comd Jadhav, a serving officer of the Indian Navy, admitted in a confessional video that he is an operative of the Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and that his passport under the pseudonym “Hossein Mubarak Patel” was fabricated for “intelligence gathering”. Admitting Jadhav was a citizen the Indian Foreign Office claimed he had taken “early retirement from the Indian Navy” but was unable to explain away his passport. Before she and her children were whisked away by Indian intelligence agencies Jadhav’s wife confirmed he was due to retire in 2022. His phone calls in Marathi to his family did not go with his assumed identity.

Spies and saboteurs are routinely dealt with a Field General Court Martial (FGCM) under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) under the Manual of Pakistan Military Law (MPML). Jadhav has the right of appeal to Pakistan’s Supreme Court within 60 days. Every country in the world, including India, has similar statutes and provisions in law. Reacting angrily after the death verdict by a military court, some BJP politicians demanded the Baloch form a government-in-exile and that the Indian govt declare Balochistan ‘an independent state’. Could there be a more blatant example of interference in the internal affairs of another country or inciting its breakup?

While ICJ did not allow Jadhav’s confessional video before a Magistrate that he was tasked by RAW to plan, coordinate and organize espionage and sabotage activities to destabilize Pakistan to be played it is available on the internet. Recruited after the Indian Parliament attack, he ‘contributed his services’ towards information and intelligence gathering within India before RAW tasked him with establishing a small business in Chahbahar in Iran for running a clandestine terror network targetting Pakistan. Answering to Anil Kumar Gupta, the Joint Secretary of RAW, he conducted operations in Balochistan and Karachi training and launching Baloch insurgents to kill or maim Pakistani citizens. Crossing into Pakistan from the Saravan border in Iran on March 3, 2016 during one of his missions he was apprehended. Jadhav is living proof of India using terror as a strategy through its “state actors”. Remember the Tamil Tigers and Prabhakaran in Sri Lanka?

Accusing Pakistan of violating the Vienna Convention, India petitioned ICJ “to take steps to annul the decision of the military court”. Receiving limited international exposure till now the ICJ Jadhav case provides an excellent opportunity for Pakistan to disseminate to a world audience credible evidence about India’s state-sponsored terrorism destabilizing its neighbours. This challenge on the basis of violation of human rights also opens a door of opportunity highlighting the widespread Indian brutalities in Kashmir.

The ICJ’s public hearing on May 15 at “The Hague” first heard India’s observations and thereafter Pakistan’s. Former Solicitor General Harish Salve acted as India’s Counsel while QC Khawar Qureshi represented Pakistan. Pakistan not granting consular access to Jadhav despite many requests was termed by Salve as a violation of the “Vienna Convention on Consular Relations”. He said the trial was conducted without informing Jadhav and legal formalities were not followed, claiming Jadhav’s confession was forcibly extracted and that he was kidnapped from Iran, not arrested in Balochistan. Voicing fears that “Jadhav will be executed before this trial ends”, he requested the court to stay the carrying out of the death sentence.

Queen’s Counsel (QC) Khawar Qureshi said in Pakistan’s response that Jadhav was not eligible for consular access and that India had approached the ICJ in haste. Labeling India’s petition as “time-wasting tactics” he called upon the ICJ to dismiss the petition. Khawar asked if India had accepted Jadhav as its national why they had not provided his birth certificate, Indian passport, etc? India did not provide any evidence to prove Jadhav’s innocence or that he is not an Indian spy. Responding to India’s contention that Jadhav’s trial was in gross violation of the Vienna Convention, Khawar noted that it provisions are not intended to apply to a ‘spy’ involved in terror and espionage activities. Consular access between India and Pakistan is decided solely on the basis of the 2008 bilateral agreement which stipulates such access will be subject to discretion if arrested is made on political and security grounds, such as in Jadhav’s case.

Khawar requested the court to cancel India’s application on three grounds viz there is no urgency, the relief sought by India is manifestly unavailable and the jurisdiction is limited. Pointed out precedents where ICJ decisions were not followed, Paraguay Vs USA, Germany Vs USA and Mexico Vs USA ignored the ICJ verdicts and domestic laws prevailed, Khawar cited the 1999 aerial incident in June 2000 where (based on arguments by India), the ICJ ruled it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute brought by Pakistan against India in September 1999 relating to India’s shooting down of an unarmed Pakistan Navy aircraft in Aug 1999. Khawar said it was wholly inappropriate to invoke jurisdiction of this court for purpose of political grandstanding.

On May 10, the Indian media reported the “stay order” by which the ICJ had “restrained Pakistan from Jadhav’s execution”, this proved to be false. Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj even tweeted that she “has told the spy’s mother about the court stay order”. The ICJ may or may not agree to India’s request for provisional measures but even if it does it would keep its perfidy in the international spotlight.

The Federal Information Ministry’s job is primarily to promote the image of the State and its critical installations, secondly to promote the image of the Government that it serves. Pervez Rasheed’s primary interest was in attacking the Army and Imran Khan, in that order. Leaving the Army alone, Mariam Aurangzeb mostly goes after Imran Khan. She should stick to her primary aim of projecting Pakistan and protecting its institutions, leaving attacking Imran Khan to Danyal Aziz since this well suited and booted gentleman seems to have nothing else better to do in life. India challenge by going to the ICJ inadvertently gives us a unique opportunity of not only internationalizing the Jadhav affair but more importantly opens the door for exposing the murderous violation of human rights in Kashmir.

The writer is a defence and security analyst.
http://southasianmonitor.com/2017/05/19/international-ising-jadhav/

 

[GlobalVillageSpace]

ICJ’s verdict: Delhi upping the verbal campaign against Pakistan
Global Village Space |

News Analysis |

Amid rising tensions between India and Pakistan, the former has launched yet another verbal diatribe. The provisional measures of the ICJ which only asked Pakistan to hold Kulbushan Jadhav’s execution until the final decision have been welcomed with jubilation and have also led to high pitched vociferous statements against Pakistan.

Responsible people at the helm in India continue with their heated comments despite realizing the danger associated with further conflagration in their remarks. Defense minister Arun Jaitley mocked the Pakistani judicial system.

“This order, though interim, is a very serious indictment of the kind of mockery that exists in Pakistan in the name of the judicial system.”
– Arun Jaitley

Read more: ICJ’s verdict: Can Pakistan unmask India on the global platform?

He again raised questions on the trial that was conducted by the Pakistani military court. ”Unless there is an effective defense, the proceeding doesn’t inspire the confidence and fairness, consular access is part of the right to defense.”

It must be recalled that India did not even request consular access to Jadhav. The ICJ, therefore, has not yet given consular access to Jadhav. Paragraph 43 of the decision states:

“I assure the nation that under the leadership of Prime Minister Modi we will leave no stone unturned to save#KulbhushanJadhav.”
– Sushma Swaraj

“The rights to consular notification and access between a State and its nationals, as well as the obligations of the detaining State to inform, without delay, the person concerned of his rights with regard to consular assistance and to allow their exercise, are recognized in Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention. Regarding Pakistan’s arguments that, first, Article 36 of the Vienna Convention does not apply to persons suspected of espionage or terrorism, and that, second, the rules applicable to the case at hand are provided in the 2008 Agreement. The Court considers that at this stage of the proceedings, where no legal analysis on these questions has been advanced by the Parties, these arguments do not provide a sufficient basis to exclude the plausibility of the rights claimed by India, for the same reasons provided above (see paragraphs 32-33).”

The Minister for External Affairs, Sushma Swaraj took to Twitter to ”celebrate” the ”victory”.

Read full article:
ICJ’s verdict: Delhi upping the verbal campaign against Pakistan

 

[Post Colonnial]

unmask about what? that India uses spies?

 

[ito]

I don't think Indians are dumb that they will defend a terrorist in ICJ. I believe Jadhav is innocent and India has tight case.

 

[Super Falcon]

Army should act and take nawaz out mostly public is against nawaz Sharif as he is pm I don't see jhadav be hanged

 

[Osiris]

Pakistan is in for a rude shock if it thinks ICJ trial will expose Jhadav's supposed "terrorist activities."

Deciding Weather Jhadav is a terrorist or not is not in ICJ jurisdiction. that is why Jhadav's "confession tape" was not even admitted by the court.

The ICJ case is about weather Jhadav received a fair trial in a Military court without any consular access probably not even proper representation, denying him basic human right to a fair trial.

India wants ICJ to declare Jhadavs trial by Pakistan as mistrial and Pakistan has helped India a lot by not providing him a consular access and holding the entire trial in great secrecy in military court.