Only Pakistan ICJ judge voted against India in 15-1 verdict in Kulbhushan Jadhav case

0
419

The International Court of Justice that ruled in favour of India’s request against the death penalty handed down to Kulbhushan Jadhav and stayed his execution delivered its verdict by a 15:1 majority. The only dissenting voice in the 16-member world court on most counts was ad-hoc judge Tassaduq Hussain Gillani, 69, a former chief justice of Pakistan.

Judge Gillani concurred with his fellow judges on only one point: That the ICJ, variously also referred to as the UN court or world court, has jurisdiction to hear India’s plea against Pakistan over Kulbhushan Jadhav.

Also read: Sudan’s ruling military and opposition sign power-sharing deal

On each of the seven other points on which the ICJ ruled by a 15:1 majority, Judge Gillani was consistently the dissenting judge.

1. ICJ rejected Pakistan’s three objections to the UN court admitting India’s request.

2. ICJ concluded that Pakistan breached its obligations under the Vienna convention by not informing Mr Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav of his rights to consular access under this pact.

3. The world court concluded that Pakistan had breached its obligations under the Vienna convention by not informing India about the arrest “without delay”. Pakistan had taken nearly three weeks to inform New Delhi about Kulbhushan Jadhav’s arrest.

4. The UN court concluded that Pakistan deprived 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. Accordingly, the judges concluded that Pakistan had breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

5. The ICJ ordered Pakistan “to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav” as reparation for the breach of his rights.

6. The ICJ directed Pakistan to inform 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. The ICJ declared 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”.

LEAVE A REPLY