Pakistan to file rejoinder to ICJ on Kulbhushan Jadhav case
19 April, 2018
ISLAMABAD: Islamabad is expected to file its counter rejoinder on or before July 17 in the Indian spy Commander Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav’s case as New Delhi has submitted its rejoinder to Pakistan’s counter memorial to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The office of the attorney general for Pakistan, which is overseeing the case, is expected to receive the copy of the Indian rejoinder in a day or two after it is received by the embassy of Pakistan in The Hague.
On Dec 13, 2017, Pakistan filed its counter memorial before the ICJ, a world court that sits at the Peace Palace in The Hague and is seized with the Indian complaint on the conviction of the Indian spy.
On May 18, the ICJ through an interim order had stayed Jadhav’s execution after which the Foreign Office communicated to the ICJ that the government of Pakistan had instructed relevant departments to give effect to the order of the world court.
Khawar Qureshi QC, who pleaded Pakistan’s case at the initial stage, is expected to plead the case of the country even now.
Jadhav was captured in Balochistan on March 2016 and later confessed to his association with Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and his involvement in espionage and fomenting terrorism in Pakistan. In 2017 Field General Court Martial awarded him death sentence which was confirmed by Chief of the Army Staff Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa on April 10 this year.
In its written pleadings India had accused Pakistan of violating the Vienna Convention by not giving consular access to Jadhav arguing that the convention did not say that such access would not be available to an individual arrested on the allegation of espionage.
In response Pakistan through its counter memorial told the ICJ that the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 applied only to legitimate visitors and did not cover clandestine operations.
Pakistan argued that the Indian spy was on active duty and the only deduction that one could make was that he was a spy sent inside Pakistan on a special mission to carry out subversive activities.
Islamabad argued that India had no explanation why a serving naval commander working on secondment to the RAW was travelling to and from Pakistan on the cover of a Muslim name.
The counter pleadings stated that only a state which adhered to legitimate actions with clean hands could request the world court to intervene in a matter between two countries. But India was a habitual violator of human rights and had not honoured since long the United Nations resolutions for holding plebiscite in Kashmir, Pakistan argued, emphasising that the use of pellet guns against peaceful protesters in Kashmir was a case in point.
Sending Jadhav inside Pakistan on espionage and funding of terrorists activities by giving him a false identity disentitled India from invoking jurisdiction of the ICJ, Pakistan argued.