ICJ on the Kulbhushan Jadhav’s Case

Must Read

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus....

Follow us

Facts

Mr. Kulbhushan Jadhav was arrested by Pakistan and been in Pakistan’s custody since 3rd March, 2016. India had requested consular access many a times to Pakistan. But, without granting any access, Pakistan’s Court Martial sentenced Jadhav to death on 10th April, 2017 for espionage, sabotage and terrorism. Against this injustice, India alleged violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Access of 24 April, 1963 in the International Court of Justice.

Issues

  • Whether the International Court of Justice has prima facie jurisdiction under Article I of the Optional Protocol?
  • Whether the sentence of the Court Martial of the Pakistan is in defiance of the Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Access?
  • Can the court order for provisional measures for preventing the execution of Mr. Jadhav?

Judgment

With regarding to the issue of maintainability, the court held that it was sufficient if the case can prima facie fall within the scope of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. The Article 36 deals with the rights of the countries to get consular access. Under the Article I of the Optional Protocol, the International Court of Justice have jurisdiction when a case concerning the interpretation and the applicability of the Vienna Convention is brought up. Therefore, the court denied Pakistan’s objections towards the maintainability and upheld its jurisdiction.

Thereafter, Pakistan argued that Article 36 of the Vienna Convention does not apply to cases of espionage, sabotage and terrorism. The court rejected this argument by stating that no legal analysis has been given regarding that by either parties. The court found that the rights invoked by India are plausible.

The court, then, turned towards the possibility for ordering provisional measures. There requires an irreparable prejudice and urgency for ordering provisional measures into a given case. Pakistan argued that there was no urgency. Jadhav had the legal option to apply for the clemency within 150 days. Therefore, the normal legal procedures of the Pakistan’s system itself can be sought to delay and re-examine the trial. But, the court rejected this argument too.

The court held that there is a risk of irreparable prejudice to India by the mere fact that as long as Mr. Jadhav is under the death sentence, he can be executed by Pakistan at any moment.

Therefore, the court ordered Pakistan to take all such measures to prevent the execution of Mr. Jadhav till the present proceedings ended and also, inform the court about the measures taken.

Learning Outcome

India was able to successfully stall the execution of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.

For other stories on Kulbhushan Jadhav, please click here.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -