No it does not preclude him from the meeting. But according to vienna convention it requires Pakistan to grant consular access to anyone held as a spy which Pakistan denied. That's Kulbushan's BASIC right. Now after deniying it, and awarding him death penalty without a fair trial you cant say you have allowed him his human rights. Its not as simple as allowing his family to see him through a guarded glass room and call it a family meeting on Humanitarian grounds. while there is nothing humane about the meet.
No, I don't believe there's anything in vienna conventions for those convicted of espionage and spying. Whether or not you consider the meeting as humanitarian doesn't matter. Fact of the matter is a convicted spy was allowed to see his family. That doesn't happen very often.
ATM ICJ is all that matters to us as well. Infact let me tell you that the whole idea of allowing this meet was to improve its case in ICJ for Pakistan.Infact Pakistan had a perfect opportunity to arrange the meeting in a transparent way and prove that the whole action was on genuine humanitarian ground instead of conducting it in a manner that raises doubts.
I do not see how it was conducted in a way that it raises doubt. To be honest, it appears you that you are gaslighting here.
If you look closely, Jadhav is not in a condition that he is supposed to be in. He has clear injury marks which was tried to be hidden. The whole idea of glassscreen is for that.
The idea for glass screen is so that nothing can be passed from one to the other. No where in the world will you see convicted criminals have unfettered access like you are proposing.
The family was not allowed to meet the press. Pakistani diplomats are sill not sure what they want to call this. One also declared this to be a consular access. then other official backtracked. Moreover the reason for not giving consular itself seems very weird.
Why would you expect the family be allowed to meet the press inside Pakistan? That's a silly demand. No one called it consular access, it was poor reporting by journalists. The reason for not giving consular access is because he's convicted of espionage.
That's the whole idea. See if Pakistan really did have any evidence against KBY then trust me there was no reason for not allowing a consular access.
I don't see how your conclusion follows from your premise. There's nothing that suggests that has consistently happened in other cases of espionage. I am fairly certain that Indian spies that were convicted of spying in the past, who were then released decades later and confessed to spying as soon as they stepped foot in India did not have consular access. As I said, I don't think your conclusion is logical based on the premise.
Making a confession video of a captured terrorist is a childs play. Infact Pakistan is yet to accept Kasab's confession video although India was aall redy to give consular access to Kasab because India knew that it could prove that kasab was a terrorist. That's not the case here. Giving consular access would mean the truth would be out in open and even for a moment if I agree for the sake argument that KBY is indeed a terrorist the trust you me, thereis NO evidence that Pakistan has to prove it. and that my friend is the dilemma here. Consular access will alow india to have a clear insight on whats going on with KBY and then comes ICJ and then international community, etc.
Again, consular access is not the norm for those convicted of spying. Whatever you are espousing is merely your understanding, but it doesn't work that way internationally. As for evidence, having a fake passport is about as smoking gun an evidence as it comes. It for sure means that he's a spy at the very least.
You are talking about ICJ and international community. No one at ICJ or international community is even debating that there is enough evidence against KY or not. Game of spies is allows a case of he said she said and no one gives a sh*t about them besides the two nations. This again is a case of the "noise" that I was mentioning earlier, you can declare that there is no evidence against KY but that really matters to one.
but again Pakistan knows very well how this may hamper Pakistan's case in any future contest in international case especially since its trying hard to play K card and malogn India.
Pakistan should have known that India would never accept ICJ's jurisdiction in Kashmir case and not have bothered with this case in ICJ.
Its a Tit for tat case here. whatever goes for India, it goes same for Pakitan and vice versa in ICJ. India will definitely see what the judgement is on Kashmir, and then see whether to agree or not. am I right ? I agree with you that India will not accept of its against it. But that point is that when will the issue make it to a point that we'll bee needing to discuss the K case in the same manner waiting for the ICJ decision the way we are doing it for KBY case. Af of Now we are waiting for the decision on KBY and any decision not accepted by Pakitan put Pakistan on the back foot first and then when Kashmir issue comes it will be seen what decision Pakitan made. any ICJ decision that Pakistan wil NOT ADHERE to will make India more comfortable when the Kashmiri decision is to be delivered (if at all).
The idea of taking on this case is stupid, because India will not accept ICJ's jurisdiction independent of the outcome of this case. So that's why I think this case is just noise and a waste of time and money, and only good for keyboard warriors to add more post counts and for politicians to keep their jobs.
