International Court of Justice | |
---|---|
Website | www.icj-cij.org |
President | |
Currently | Joan Donoghue |
Since | 8 February 2021 |
Sir Thiruvarur Muthuswamy Iyer | |
---|---|
Born | 28 January 1832 Vuchuwadi, British India |
Died | 25 January 1895 (aged 62) Madras, British India |
The Court therefore concluded that Pakistan had breached the obligations incumbent on it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention, by denying India’s consular officers access to Mr. Jadhav, contrary to their right to visit him, converse and correspond with him, and arrange for his legal representation.
Public hearings on the merits of the case were held from 18 to 21 February 2019. In its Judgment of 17 July 2019, the Court first outlined the background of the dispute, before concluding that it had jurisdiction to entertain India’s claims based on alleged violations of the Vienna Convention. The Court next addressed the three objections ...
Jadhav case (India v. Pakistan) - The Court finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, in the matter of the detention and trial of an Indian national, Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, has acted in breach of the obligations incumbent on it under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
Jadhav (India v. Pakistan) - Provisional Measures - The Court indicates to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan that it must take “all measures at its disposal” to prevent the execution of an Indian national, Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, pending final judgment of the Court
With regard to India’s contention that it was entitled to restitutio in integrum, its request for the Court to annul the decision of the military court and restrain Pakistan from giving effect to the sentence or conviction, and its further request for the Court to direct Pakistan to take steps to annul the decision of the military court, release Mr. Jadhav and facilitate his safe passage to India, the Court found that the submissions made by India could not be upheld. The Court also found, however, that Pakistan was under an obligation to provide, by means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight was given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Vienna Convention.
Public sitting held on Wednesday 20 February 2019, at 3 p.m., at the Peace Palace, President Yusuf presiding, in the Jadhav case (India v. Pakistan)
Jadhav of his rights, it was under an obligation to inform India’s consular post of his arrest and detention, that obligation also being implied by the rights of consular officers, under Article 36, paragraph 1 (c) of the Convention, to visit the national, “to converse and correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation”. The Court then pointed out that Pakistan had notified India of Mr. Jadhav’s arrest and detention on 25 March 2016, some three weeks after his arrest; taking account of the particular circumstances of the case, the Court considered that Pakistan had thus breached its obligation to inform the consular post “without delay”, as required by Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention.
Pakistan will have three months to file a counter-memorial.
India alleges that denial of consular access breaches Pakistan’s obligations under Article 36 (1) of the VCCR, to which both States are parties.
Pakistan (Jadhav case) before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the ICJ has published a briefing paper to clarify the key issues and relevant laws raised in the case in a Question and Answer format. The case concerns Pakistan’s failure to allow for consular access to an Indian national detained on charges of serious crimes.
Pakistani authorities arrested Jadhav on 3 March 2016. India was informed of the arrest on 25 March 2016. On 10 April 2017, Pakistan’s military announced Jadhav had been convicted and sentenced to death by a military court for “espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan.”.
India’s requests for consular access, made at least sixteen times starting from 25 March 2016, were either denied by Pakistan or made conditional upon India’s assistance in the investigation against Jadhav.
Claim was made in response to a suggestion that New Delhi could’ve hired a better lawyer. The UN court has reserved its verdict on an Indian petition seeking stay on execution of Jadhav, a self-confessed spy under custody in Pakistan. PHOTO: ICJ.
The UN court has reserved its verdict on an Indian petition seeking stay on execution of Jadhav, a self-confessed spy under custody in Pakistan.