What's new

ICJ rejects India’s plea for acquittal, repatriation of Kulbhushan - Updates, News & Discussion

Intriguing that Pakistan still has the option of deciding to follow the ICJ ruling or not. A decision by its leadership either way will have pros and cons to it. It will be interesting to watch what happens next. I am out till then.



The court acknowledged its lack of jurisdiction over this matter clearly.

It further observed the following:

"141. The Court notes that, according to Pakistan, the High Courts of Pakistan can exercise review jurisdiction. The Court observes, however, that Article 199, paragraph 3, of the Constitution of Pakistan has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan as limiting the availability of such review for a person who is subject to any law relating to the Armed Forces of Pakistan, including the Pakistan Army Act of 1952. The Supreme Court has stated that the High Courts and the Supreme Court may exercise judicial review over a decision of the Field General Court Martial on “the grounds of coram non judice, without jurisdiction or suffering from mala fides, including malice in law only” (Said Zaman Khan et al. v. Federation of Pakistan, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Civil Petition No. 842 of 2016, 29 August 2016, para. 73). Article 8, paragraph 1, of the Constitution provides that any law which is inconsistent with fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution is void, but this provision does not apply to the Pakistan Army Act of 1952 by virtue of a constitutional amendment (ibid., para. 125). Thus, it is not clear whether judicial review of a decision of a military court is available on the ground that there has been a violation of the rights set forth in Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention.

142. The Court takes note of the decision of the Peshawar High Court in 2018. The High Court held that it had the legal mandate positively to interfere with decisions of military courts “f the case of the prosecution was based, firstly, on no evidence, secondly, insufficient evidence, thirdly, absence of jurisdiction, finally malice of facts & law” (Abdur Rashid et al. v. Federation of Pakistan, High Court of Peshawar, Writ Petition 536-P of 2018, 18 October 2018, pp. 147-148). The Government of Pakistan has appealed the decision and the case was still pending at the close of the oral proceedings in the present case."
i read all 42 page bhai, no need to quote again and again....i can't even read anything on my screen anymore, specially the bold letters are irritating.....
Am not taking side with what Eagle has said. just so we stand clear.....
 
.
It would be interesting to see the eventual outcome and how long it takes.



I am quoting from the actual decision I linked previously. As I said above, it would be interesting to see the eventual outcome and how long it takes.
since morning, going over this judgement, arguing with a friend.....both sides got something to work on - India's alternate prayer was allowed and Pakistan was found in violation of not granting access.

as Niaz bhai said - a very diplomatic Judgement
 
.
since morning, going over this judgement, arguing with a friend.....both sides got something to work on - India's alternate prayer was allowed and Pakistan was found in violation of not granting access.

as Niaz bhai said - a very diplomatic Judgement

Just another day in international geopolitics. :D

What each sides makes of what the ICJ gave it to build its case further will be interesting to watch. This show is best watched impassionately IMO.
 
.
What each sides makes of what the ICJ gave it to build its case further will be interesting to watch.

Yes. That is the real point and an interesting watch. Between these two countries, this decision would be milled into a proper pudding.
 
.
Nice try at this, but hey our diplomats will be there for the 17th time for consular access and chop chop make necessary steps for it, get things ready for another trial too. Not a sham one this time.
First RAW officials will have to submit a "request" to Pakistani military court to have this case reopened and reviewed and dont forget to submit original appointment letter and JD along with application otherwise it will be rejected
 
.
Yes. That is the real point and an interesting watch. Between these two countries, this decision would be milled into a proper pudding.

Pakistan has a history of winning battles and losing wars, politically speaking.

While being correct about its rights to deal with a spy, it will cause untold further damage to its reputation as a violator of international conventions, just like it has (and is) doing by holding Dr. Afridi. Jadhav will remain valuable for India not as a field asset, but as a means to further tarnish Pakistan internationally.

I hope that PMIK will chose wisely how to proceed. His swift release of W. Cdr. Abhinandan was a master stroke in defusing further escalation at a tricky time, so there is hope. He better be ready to deal with the Orange Ape when he asks for Afridi's release as a feather in his failing bouffant to show the dumb Murrikans and get something far more useful to Pakistan, in return.
 
.
What a diplomatic verdict, almost like the proclamations of the Delphi oracle; both the sides got something they wanted hence both claim that they have been vindicated.

I heard the verdict from start to finish, on more than half the accounts it went against Pakistan, however, in the key areas it went against India albeit the case would be retried. All Jadhav has got is a temporary stay of the execution.

IMHO nothing has changed, Mr.K. Jahdav will be given Consular access, he may even be allowed an Indian defense lawyer, but as the case will be tried in Pakistan according to Pakistani Laws, end result would still be same.

Humble question - I happen to hear the ruling towards the end of it. The judge was talking about the retrail to be done keeping cognisance of vienna convention. Right before he was quoting the decision of Peshawar high court (which was not decided when the representations were made), he made a comment to event make changes to law and procedural rules, via parliamental intervention (?) to ensure that vienna convention requirements on fair trail are met (which method to use, is at full discretion of pakistan). So, if again military court is used with same existing Military court rules, don't you think the proceeding will get challenged again in ICJ?

not the Judgement but ICJ press release:

The Court notes that the obligation to provide effective review and reconsideration can be carried out in various ways. The choice of means is left to Pakistan. Nevertheless, freedom in the choice of means is not without qualification. The obligation to provide effective review and reconsideration is an obligation of result which must be performed unconditionally. Consequently, Pakistan shall take all measures to provide for effective review and reconsideration, including, if necessary, by enacting appropriate legislation. The Court finally considers that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Jadhav.
@niaz bhai (am taking the liberty to use that respect, as foxtrot used that) - the red part is what i am interested in getting your opinion on
 
. . .
Humble question - I happen to hear the ruling towards the end of it. The judge was talking about the retrail to be done keeping cognisance of vienna convention. Right before he was quoting the decision of Peshawar high court (which was not decided when the representations were made), he made a comment to event make changes to law and procedural rules, via parliamental intervention (?) to ensure that vienna convention requirements on fair trail are met (which method to use, is at full discretion of pakistan). So, if again military court is used with same existing Military court rules, don't you think the proceeding will get challenged again in ICJ?


@niaz bhai (am taking the liberty to use that respect, as foxtrot used that) - the red part is what i am interested in getting your opinion on

IMHO Mr. Jahdhav should be given full Consular access as well right to appoint any lawyer ( Indian/British or American) to plead in his defense. However, should it be proven that he was spying for India and /or engaged in acts of sabotage, he should be sentenced in accordance with the laws of Pakistan.
 
.
IMHO Mr. Jahdhav should be given full Consular access as well right to appoint any lawyer ( Indian/British or American) to plead in his defense. However, should it be proven that he was spying for India and /or engaged in acts of sabotage, he should be sentenced in accordance with the laws of Pakistan.
Thank you. Yes, I think the court also said clearly that the laws of Pakistan will apply - but i think they made a further qualification. What I think I am struggling with is the 'amendment' point and the reference to Peshawar court claim.

Point being - Is Pakistan exposed to another round in ICJ, in case of same old routine and/or trial by military court.

Followed up at the end of a busy work day and it seems the Indian counsel (who is one of India's most famous lawyer and did this pro bono for India) did a press conference and he says that this can be challenged again in ICJ, if the red highlighted part from my previous quote is not adhered to.
 
.
Thank you. Yes, I think the court also said clearly that the laws of Pakistan will apply - but i think they made a further qualification. What I think I am struggling with is the 'amendment' point and the reference to Peshawar court claim.

Point being - Is Pakistan exposed to another round in ICJ, in case of same old routine and/or trial by military court.

Followed up at the end of a busy work day and it seems the Indian counsel (who is one of India's most famous lawyer and did this pro bono for India) did a press conference and he says that this can be challenged again in ICJ, if the red highlighted part from my previous quote is not adhered to.

Sorry Sir,
Being a layman in "law", I regret my inability to comment on this one.
 
. .
thanks to Vcheng, there had to be no effort made by me to open up the judgement and get the relevant section for you:

"136. As regards India’s claim based on the Vienna Convention, the Court considers that it is not the conviction and sentence of Mr. Jadhav which are to be regarded as a violation of the provisions of the Vienna Convention. In the Avena case, the Court confirmed that “the case before it concerns Article 36 of the Vienna Convention and not the correctness as such of any conviction or sentencing”, and that “it is not the convictions and sentences of the Mexican nationals which are to be regarded as a violation of international law, but solely certain breaches of treaty obligations [on consular access] which preceded them” (Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2004 (I), p. 60, paras. 122-123)."

Him being a spy was not even the 'Prayer' by Indian team......and ICJ did not even consider the violation of vienna convention with regards to sentencing
Icj didn't intervene with the judicial process of Pakistan that's it. Vienna convention didn't have the jurisdiction...
But for benefit of others I will upload the full judgement
For you pls see and tell me what u understood by seeing this image
Screenshot_20190719-075254.png

"Effective" review and reconsideration of conviction and sentence....

1) Icj clearly accepted that pakistan violated international Norms.
2) Asking to review itself is a shameful thing. Pakistan judiciary is seen as a biased system now.
3) it (ICJ) never says that pakistan review judgement is final and what makes you think India won't again go to icj if a favorable judgement doesn't come??

kakay! they accepted that he was issued a valid passport under a false name to conceal his true identity. Hence proved being a spy, how ever what they done is that now any person, regardless of being spy, terrorist will get councilor access regardless of his crimes through out the world!
The interpretation of that Vienna Convention clause has been now defined to the whole World, as different countries interpreted them differently!
Bhai.
Law isn't that way.
They observed that he had 2 passports. Every person with 2 passports is not a spy. He can be anything.
And it's india's jurisdiction to prosecute him for having two Indian passports. How do you know that India issued him to passports?? It could even be got through fraudulent means..
 

Attachments

  • 168-20190717-SUM-01-00-EN.pdf
    339.6 KB · Views: 68
.
Icj didn't intervene with the judicial process of Pakistan that's it. Vienna convention didn't have the jurisdiction...
But for benefit of others I will upload the full judgement
For you pls see and tell me what u understood by seeing this imageView attachment 569869
"Effective" review and reconsideration of conviction and sentence....

1) Icj clearly accepted that pakistan violated international Norms.
2) Asking to review itself is a shameful thing. Pakistan judiciary is seen as a biased system now.
3) it (ICJ) never says that pakistan review judgement is final and what makes you think India won't again go to icj if a favorable judgement doesn't come??


Bhai.
Law isn't that way.
They observed that he had 2 passports. Every person with 2 passports is not a spy. He can be anything.
And it's india's jurisdiction to prosecute him for having two Indian passports. How do you know that India issued him to passports?? It could even be got through fraudulent means..

Congratulations when do you expect him to be released?
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom