India is destroying sports in Pakistan

[Laozi]

ICC future tour program is was repalced by aggreements and MOUs between boards. You signed it and then pulled back from it.
We toured india honouring the aggreement but india broke the aggreement.
There isn't any legal provision to wiggle out of it just like indus water treaty.

Yes, the MoU has a usual clause which says that in the event of Government of either country refuse the permission to the respective boards to play, then the MoU becomes redundant and non-binding.

Indian government will keep on refusing BCCI to play Pakistan, citing security related issues.

No court International or domestic can do anything in this regard.

You have signed the MoU NOW READ IT

It's no where part of the aggreement that already placed UN resolutions are not effective.

Any agreement can and will supersede any previous agreement if the parties agree to it.

Your signing of Simla agreement de facto supersede UN resolutions

Ask any lawyer of International court.

 

[jetray]

Yes, the MoU has a usual clause which says that in the event of Government of either country refuse the permission to the respective boards to play, then the MoU becomes redundant and non-binding.

Indian government will keep on refusing BCCI to play Pakistan, citing security related issues.

No court International or domestic can do anything in this regard.

You have signed the MoU NOW READ IT



Any agreement can and will supersede any previous agreement if the parties agree to it.

Your signing of Simla agreement de facto supersede UN resolutions

Ask any lawyer of International court.

Yup, thats a MOU it has no legal value. Govts every year sign MOU stating crores of investment but nothing materializes on the ground. PCB is just wasting money.

 

[Jacob Martin]

chankiya strategy revised edition by doval.


It's no where part of the aggreement that already placed UN resolutions are not effective.

There are rules of interpretation governing agreements. One of the is known as the contra proferentum rule. Basically if a term is vague or absent then it is to be interpreted against the party seeking its inclusion. So in this case, since your claim is that UN Resolutions are outside the scope of bilateral issues as per Simla Agreement, it will not be read as including existing resolutions just because Pakistan wants it to be read in that way.

This is actually how agreements are interpreted. I am not just saying this to counter you. Although I admit I have not read the full text of the Simla Agreement and am responding to what you said.

If you can find something specific in the agreement then we can discuss it.

Yes, the MoU has a usual clause which says that in the event of Government of either country refuse the permission to the respective boards to play, then the MoU becomes redundant and non-binding.

Indian government will keep on refusing BCCI to play Pakistan, citing security related issues.

No court International or domestic can do anything in this regard.

You have signed the MoU NOW READ IT

I have been involved in arbitrations where one party could have simply secured an award based on such a preliminary ground. However, just to inflict financial misery on the other party, they chose to drag the proceedings as long as they could before finally raising the technicality.

International arbitration is expensive and PCB's resources are limited. It would be a possible course of action to consider...

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Your signing of Simla agreement de facto supersede UN resolutions

No it don't.
simla aggreement says.
the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

 

[Laozi]

No it don't.
simla aggreement says.
the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

Why do you stop at first line ? Read the agreement :

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations

It is better for Pakistan to read the UN resolution first then Simla Agreement then consult a Lawyer

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Why do you stop at first line ? Read the agreement :

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations

It is better for Pakistan to read the UN resolution first then Simla Agreement then consult a Lawyer

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.
why include UN when everyissue is bilateral????
(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.
india is breaking this part by running away from negotiations and imposing conditions on dialogs not mentioned in simla aggreement.

neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations

this clearly states thats previous situations, UN resolutions can't be changed and will always remain there. Can't be unilatrally altered.

 

[khail007]

IMO, not to blame India for all our flaws.
Thanks to our planners who lacks vision.
Look at the state of cricket, Najam Sethi and Shahryar are heading it. One is rewarded politically while other 's legs are unable to support his own weight.

 

[Zen0]

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.
why include UN when everyissue is bilateral????
(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.
india is breaking this part by running away from negotiations and imposing conditions on dialogs not mentioned in simla aggreement.

neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations

this clearly states thats previous situations, UN resolutions can't be changed and will always remain there. Can't be unilatrally altered.

Go learn English again please, it clearly says UN principles, principles means guidelines of the UN charter, all UN members have signed this charter.

Context refers to stuff like like promoting social progress , protect the peace, protecting fundamental human rights , takeing effective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace etc

 

[Margarita]

Go learn English again please, it clearly says UN principles, principles means guidelines of the UN charter, all UN members have signed this charter.

Context refers to stuff like like promoting social progress , protect the peace, protecting fundamental human rights , takeing effective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace etc

He does not know what he is talking about. @Jacob Martin has owned him on this thread and he is just clutching at straws with half baked knowledge. Its cringe worthy to say the least.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Go learn English again please, it clearly says UN principles, principles means guidelines of the UN charter, all UN members have signed this charter.

Context refers to stuff like like promoting social progress , protect the peace, protecting fundamental human rights , takeing effective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace etc

which includes abiding UN resolutions.

 

[WAJsal]

Indians behavior only reflects it's mentality and its hate for Pakistan.

My question too.

The title says ' Sports' while the article talks only of cricket.

How does playing with or in India increase the longevity of sports in Pakistan ?

More like a sore loser PCB lamenting over lost revenue

Maybe you missed this:

is also denying visas to national players so that they cannot participate in different games being held in India.”

And i didn't have to read the whole article.

 

[Jugger]

It was India who was behind attack on Srilankan team.

This is a baseless allegation without any concrete proof, just like saying all extremist attacks in Pakistan are done by India.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Reminds me of this -
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/india-out-to-destroy-pakistans-agriculture.199459/

 

[GuardianRED]

Indians behavior only reflects it's mentality and its hate for Pakistan.

Maybe you missed this:

And i didn't have to read the whole article.

What about outside india?? ... For example. what about senior Hockey ... Why wasn't the Pakistan Hockey Team NOT invited by the Malaysia for the Sultan Azlan Shah Cup?, you are going to blame india for this too?

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Indians behavior only reflects it's mentality and its hate for Pakistan.

I don't understand this. Do Enemies love each other? What is the issue here?