What's new

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

Fates of Colonel Habib Zahir and Kulbhushan Yadav are tied.

RAW has shifted it's prisoner Habib Zahir to a secret detention center in Aizawl as per former RAW chief of ops, R Bhattacharya

An interesting attempt but may be, Col. Habib fate would have been tied to some(one) else kept somewhere. RAW made a scheme but then, few months, luck would have favoured this side of border. May be its like 2:1 which seems like 1 has less demanding value/choice as compare to 2. Don't you want to go back and consult? Bhattacharya can try to play smart and through some bluff for fishing but might get an alligator waiting down under the same boat to see the hook.
 
.
What is india's point? That he accidentally was issued an Iranian passport to travel to Pakistan for terrorism? Really?

That he is just a spy. He was forced to say that he or india is not involved in terrorism inside Pakistan.
 
. . . .
at least you admit you guys are professional liars :coffee:

What are we dueling gentlemanly style?
This is spy game, it’s full of lies and deceit! Didn’t think you were that clueless!
Or is it that according to you ISI is a transparent organization with accountability in your opinion? Lol

I think the problem with you Pakistanis is that you’re bringing a knife to a gun fight lol
 
.
What is india's point? That he accidentally was issued an Iranian passport to travel to Pakistan for terrorism? Really?
You do realize that in a real trial, the burden of proof is with the prosecution. Not with the defence. You have been claiming he is responsible for terror acts. In an actual trial, you will have to give details of these terror acts with dates. The names of victims. The alleged role played by Jadhav. Where did he source RDX or explosives from. Who aided and abetted him. All of it.

Right now your actual narrative is that Jadhav is a Rambo figure going around Pak committing acts of terror. Multiple acts that too. So he is a cross between Rambo and Carlos the Jackal.

That narrative is bound to collapse. For all I know he is a spy who was lured into Pak and caught. Pak then decided to spin an entirely elaborate narrative about him to feed its people to counter India. Like in Kargil, Pak miscalculated India's response. My guess is Pak thought India will be too embarrassed and let Pak have a field day.

Now India will control the narrative.

Jadhav is just a pawn. He isn't coming home. Probably isn't too bright either.
 
. .
Both parties have accepted that he is an Indian National.

Both parties can accept but his Citizenship record still needs to be submitted by India!

There's a ruling on such a case. USA denied access to Argentina (iirc) stating citizenship proof was not submitted and Argentina took case to ICJ. ICJ rejected Argentina's plra and said the citizenship documents must be provided for access.

So you Indoos still need to complete those formalities.
 
. . .
Pakistan may give access only after that.
 
.
Right now your actual narrative is that Jadhav is a Rambo figure going around Pak committing acts of terror. Multiple acts that too. So he is a cross between Rambo and Carlos the Jackal.
Rambo was not a terrorist!
 
.
Funny you talk of reality check:
Pakistan claimed ICJ has no Jurisdication in the case:
(1) finds, unanimously, 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;

Pakistan objected to the admissibility of the Application of India in ICJ
(2) rejects, by fifteen votes to one, 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;

Pakistan Denied Consular acess to India.

(3) finds, by fifteen votes to one, 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;

Pakistan did not notify Indian consulate in the matter:
(4) finds, by fifteen votes to one, 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;

Pakistan denied consular access to India.
(5) finds, by fifteen votes to one, 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;

Pakistan claimed it was under no obligation to provide consular access to India
(6) finds, by fifteen votes to one, 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;

Pakistan claimed due judicial process was executed in te case.
(7) finds, by fifteen votes to one, that the appropriate reparation, in this case, consists in the 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;

Pakistani military court handed the death sentence in the case.
(8) declares, by fifteen votes to one, 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.


Your judicial expediency was actually better in hanging Zulfikar Ali Bhutto than Kulbhishan Yadav if memory serves right.

Now lets come to the reality check,

I. JURISDICTION
The Court, having noted that India and Pakistan are parties to the Vienna Convention and the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (hereinafter the “Optional Protocol”), finds that it has jurisdiction under Article I of the latter instrument to entertain India’s claims based on alleged violations of the Vienna Convention.

II. ADMISSIBILITY
Pakistan has raised three objections to the admissibility of India’s Application. These objections are based on
India’s alleged abuse of process,
abuse of rights and
unlawful conduct.




A. First objection: abuse of process In support of its first objection, Pakistan contends, first, that India abused its procedural rights when requesting the Court to indicate provisional measures in this case, and secondly, that before instituting the current proceedings, India failed to give consideration to other dispute - 3 - settlement mechanisms envisaged in Articles II and III of the Optional Protocol. The Court considers that neither argument can be upheld and rejects Pakistan’s first objection to the admissibility of India’s Application.

B. Second objection: abuse of rights Pakistan based its second objection on three main arguments. First, it refers to India’s refusal to “provide evidence” of Mr. Jadhav’s Indian nationality. Secondly, Pakistan mentions India’s failure to engage with its request for assistance in relation to the criminal investigations into Mr. Jadhav’s activities. Thirdly, Pakistan alleges that India authorized Mr. Jadhav to cross the Indian border with a “false cover name authentic passport” in order to conduct espionage and terrorist activities. In response to Pakistan’s first argument, the Court observes that the evidence before it shows that both Parties have considered Mr. Jadhav to be an Indian national. With regard to the second and third arguments, based on various alleged breaches of India’s obligations under Security Council resolution 1373 (2001), the Court is of the view that such allegations are properly a matter for the merits and therefore cannot be invoked as a ground of inadmissibility. For these reasons, the Court finds that Pakistan’s second objection to the admissibility of India’s Application must be rejected. The second and third arguments advanced by Pakistan are addressed by the Court when dealing with the merits.

C. Third objection: India’s alleged unlawful conduct In its third objection, Pakistan asks the Court to dismiss the Application on the basis of India’s alleged unlawful conduct, relying on the “clean hands” doctrine and the principles of “ex turpi causa non oritur actio” and “ex injuria jus non oritur”. The Court considers that none of the arguments put forward can be upheld and rejects Pakistan’s third objection to the admissibility of India’s Application.

Long come short, only Indian access achievement and the rest stays as whatever it is. Conclusively, Indian side now has to work and understand to face that "Pakistan will provide counselor access & review death sentence as per our choosing/way of trial". Posting the proceeding wouldn't matter as the verdict is being announced. 15 votes for counselor access and nothing more. KJ is staying here and so the further advertisement will done in the meantime as how Spy Game went wrong for India.
 
.
Indians, oh Indians, self deluding, grandstanding Indians.
SupaPowa without any power.
World most richest country with 600 millions living in abject poverty.
In a country where million born and die on the footpath never seen roof on their heads.
But its Bollywood heroes wear Bandanas, film in foreign countries to show an image not found in India.
To show life styles which is beyond 99% of its population. But hay what reality have to do with SupaPowa.

Same way Pakistan knew the counselor access would be granted. It was very very short shot.
If they were long shot why made it!!
But being deluded Indians you have failed to deduced what is the real meaning and impact of the decision.

When you take a case to a court which title itself "International Court of Justice" it is neigh impossible that it would say that it doesn't have jurisdictions on world cases.
The rejections of Pakistani pleas were not only expected but understandable.
So in all three points rejection of Pakistan's instance was ICJ safeguarding its own rights and jurisdictions rather than enhancing Indians point of view.

The rest has spectacularly backfired on India.
Coming from a person whose country's revenue are less than 1/25th of what we spend in our budget, is rich. Our subsidies are twice your budget.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom