DG ISPR on ICJ verdict: another 27th February for india...another surprise day!

[greenblooded]

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Fighting against the foreign terrorists is the easiest part!! The toughest part is to fight against the “Last Mujibs” - the ultimate proxy traitor terrorists at the hand of the die hard enemies to hammer down the final mortal blow....

 

[Verve]

Basically no c.access!

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

kisi ki to futt gaye !

 

[war&peace]

He called the success a success.... no brainer

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Indeed, India is now certified sponsor of terrorism. This should not stop here now, and taken to logical conclusion on world forum like FATF and squeeze India economically and through sanctions regime.

 

[greenblooded]

Indeed, India is now certified sponsor of terrorism. This should not stop here now, and taken to logical conclusion on world forum like FATF and squeeze India economically and through sanctions regime.

india is sitting on uncle sams lap.We can't do any damage to them atleast on diplomatic level

 

[Zapper]

THE COURT,
(1) Unanimously, Finds that it has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article I of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963, to entertain the Application filed by the Republic of India on 8 May 2017;

(2) By fifteen votes to one, Rejects the objections by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the admissibility of the Application of the Republic of India and finds that the Application of the Republic of India is admissible

(3) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not informing Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without delay of his rights under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under that provision;

(4) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not notifying the appropriate consular post of the Republic of India in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without delay of the detention of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav and thereby depriving the Republic of India of the right to render the assistance provided for by the Vienna Convention to the individual concerned, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(5) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan deprived the Republic of India of the right to communicate with and have access to Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation, and thereby breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(6) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without further delay of his rights and to provide Indian consular officers access to him in accordance with Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(7) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the appropriate reparation in this case consists in the obligation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Convention, taking account of paragraphs 139, 145 and 146 of this Judgment;

(8) By fifteen votes to one, Declares that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.

Summary: Pakistan has violated international law by denying India consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled. The ICJ in the Hague, in a 15-1 decision, ruled that Pakistan had failed to inform Mr Jadhav of his rights, and deprived the Indian government "of the right to communicate with and have access to [him], to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation".
"A continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensible condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence,". The only judge to dissent was Tassaduq Hussain Jillani. ICJ president judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, who read out the judgement, also directed Pakistan to review and reconsider the death sentence awarded to Jadhav under the provisions of the 1963 Vienna Convention that defines a framework for consular relations between countries

https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/168/168-20190717-SUM-01-00-EN.pdf
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48932951

 

[Areesh]

THE COURT,
(1) Unanimously, Finds that it has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article I of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963, to entertain the Application filed by the Republic of India on 8 May 2017;

(2) By fifteen votes to one, Rejects the objections by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the admissibility of the Application of the Republic of India and finds that the Application of the Republic of India is admissible

(3) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not informing Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without delay of his rights under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under that provision;

(4) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not notifying the appropriate consular post of the Republic of India in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without delay of the detention of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav and thereby depriving the Republic of India of the right to render the assistance provided for by the Vienna Convention to the individual concerned, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(5) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan deprived the Republic of India of the right to communicate with and have access to Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation, and thereby breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(6) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without further delay of his rights and to provide Indian consular officers access to him in accordance with Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(7) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the appropriate reparation in this case consists in the obligation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Convention, taking account of paragraphs 139, 145 and 146 of this Judgment;

(8) By fifteen votes to one, Declares that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.

Summary: Pakistan has violated international law by denying India consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled. The ICJ in the Hague, in a 15-1 decision, ruled that Pakistan had failed to inform Mr Jadhav of his rights, and deprived the Indian government "of the right to communicate with and have access to [him], to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation".
"A continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensible condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence,". The only judge to dissent was Tassaduq Hussain Jillani. ICJ president judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, who read out the judgement, also directed Pakistan to review and reconsider the death sentence awarded to Jadhav under the provisions of the 1963 Vienna Convention that defines a framework for consular relations between countries

https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/168/168-20190717-SUM-01-00-EN.pdf
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48932951

Good selective copy pasting

Now the ground reality is:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1151514480985034752

 

[Dubious]

THE COURT,
(1) Unanimously, Finds that it has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article I of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963, to entertain the Application filed by the Republic of India on 8 May 2017;

(2) By fifteen votes to one, Rejects the objections by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the admissibility of the Application of the Republic of India and finds that the Application of the Republic of India is admissible

(3) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not informing Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without delay of his rights under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under that provision;

(4) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that, by not notifying the appropriate consular post of the Republic of India in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without delay of the detention of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav and thereby depriving the Republic of India of the right to render the assistance provided for by the Vienna Convention to the individual concerned, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(5) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan deprived the Republic of India of the right to communicate with and have access to Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation, and thereby breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(6) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without further delay of his rights and to provide Indian consular officers access to him in accordance with Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;

(7) By fifteen votes to one, Finds that the appropriate reparation in this case consists in the obligation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Convention, taking account of paragraphs 139, 145 and 146 of this Judgment;

(8) By fifteen votes to one, Declares that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.

Summary: Pakistan has violated international law by denying India consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled. The ICJ in the Hague, in a 15-1 decision, ruled that Pakistan had failed to inform Mr Jadhav of his rights, and deprived the Indian government "of the right to communicate with and have access to [him], to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation".
"A continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensible condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence,". The only judge to dissent was Tassaduq Hussain Jillani. ICJ president judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, who read out the judgement, also directed Pakistan to review and reconsider the death sentence awarded to Jadhav under the provisions of the 1963 Vienna Convention that defines a framework for consular relations between countries

https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/168/168-20190717-SUM-01-00-EN.pdf
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48932951

Victory by dancing around 1 point?

 

[Microsoft]

Basically ICJ questioned Pakistani military courts and its inhuman procedures.
Secondly ICJ did not agree to the way Pakistan conducted the trial.
Third ICJ pointed out that Pakistan violated Viennna convention.
Fourth ICJ asked Pakistan to take back its decision to conduct a fresh trial as per Vienna convention providing consular access to Jadhav.

Yes surely this is feb 27 th moment where Indian Mig 21 chasing 3 F16, who were running away after a failed attempt to bomb Indian positions, shot down a PAF F16.

"B-b-bbbut the Vienna convention!" Sounds like DG ISPR is correct in saying this is another surprise day. That's the same thing buffoons were muttering on Feb 27 when Abhinandan was sipping on hot chai.

 

[Srinivas]

"B-b-bbbut the Vienna convention!" Sounds like DG ISPR is correct in saying this is another surprise day. That's the same thing buffoons were muttering on Feb 27 when Abhinandan was sipping on hot chai.

Every thing is quite opposite in Pakistan.

It is rather an embarrassing day for Pakistan. Your sham military courts were questioned by ICJ.
Regarding Jhadav ICJ never said he is a spy.

 

[Dubious]

inhuman procedures.

no just violation of 1 human rights...far less than what is happening in Kashmir

Secondly ICJ did not agree to the way Pakistan conducted the trial.

Review can be called by anyone...listen to the video in OP...it explains so!

Third Pakistan violated Viennna convention.

Same as the 1st...we violated 1 code of no counselor access

Fourth ICJ asked Pakistan to take back its decision to conduct a fresh trial as per Vienna convention providing consular access to Jadhav.

That is not stated...Review is not the same as retrial! And it is by our courts not indian! So our courts and their process has been accepted at international levels!

Your sham military courts were questioned by ICJ.

we dont have a dictatorship...our process can be questioned no harm done! Only in india do they block UN access to Kashmir! Now that is a different stage and shows something is hidden ours wasnt!

 

[Taimoor Khan]

india is sitting on uncle sams lap.We can't do any damage to them atleast on diplomatic level

Keep on exposing them and be relentless, uncle will give in.

 

[Chhatrapati]

A court actually superceded his military court. With panel consisting of Indian judges despite nay vote from Pak judge.

Sure... It's another Feb 27.