The Crossbill News Desk
India has dismissed a recent ruling by the Court of Arbitration in The Hague regarding the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), reaffirming its longstanding rejection of the tribunal’s legitimacy and declaring its findings non-binding.
The ruling, issued on June 27, stated that India’s decision to place the treaty “in abeyance” would not impact the court’s jurisdiction—a position India has firmly rejected.
In a strong statement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) reiterated that it does not recognise the legitimacy of the five-member Court of Arbitration.
“India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India’s position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void,” the statement said.
India has consistently held that the establishment of this tribunal violates the terms of the IWT, which was brokered by the World Bank in 1960.
India had announced on April 23 that it was placing the treaty in abeyance following a terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, targeting tourists.
The government said the suspension would remain until Pakistan verifiably ceased its support for cross-border terrorism. Pakistan, in turn, rejected the move, claiming the treaty contains no provision for unilateral suspension.
The Court of Arbitration was constituted in 2016 following a request by Pakistan to address concerns over India’s hydropower projects.
India, however, pushed for the matter to be referred to a Neutral Expert and boycotted the arbitration process. Although the World Bank initially paused both mechanisms, it lifted the hold in 2022 and allowed both to proceed simultaneously—a move India opposed.
Despite India’s non-participation, Pakistan continued engaging with both the tribunal and the Neutral Expert mechanism.
In response to the developments, including India's suspension of the treaty and heightened military tensions, the tribunal sought input from both countries in May 2024. While Pakistan responded, India did not.
In its June 27 order, the tribunal concluded that India’s suspension of the treaty did not affect its jurisdiction or that of the Neutral Expert. Dismissing the tribunal’s conclusion, the MEA asserted that India’s action was within its sovereign rights under international law.
It described the arbitration proceedings as a “charade” orchestrated by Pakistan to distract from its continued support for terrorism and manipulation of international institutions.
New Delhi's sharp rebuke underscores its refusal to engage with or accept any outcome from the arbitration process, even as Islamabad pursues the matter through international legal channels.
The ruling, issued on June 27, stated that India’s decision to place the treaty “in abeyance” would not impact the court’s jurisdiction—a position India has firmly rejected.
In a strong statement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) reiterated that it does not recognise the legitimacy of the five-member Court of Arbitration.
“India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India’s position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty and consequently any proceedings before this forum and any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void,” the statement said.
India has consistently held that the establishment of this tribunal violates the terms of the IWT, which was brokered by the World Bank in 1960.
India had announced on April 23 that it was placing the treaty in abeyance following a terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, targeting tourists.
The government said the suspension would remain until Pakistan verifiably ceased its support for cross-border terrorism. Pakistan, in turn, rejected the move, claiming the treaty contains no provision for unilateral suspension.
The Court of Arbitration was constituted in 2016 following a request by Pakistan to address concerns over India’s hydropower projects.
India, however, pushed for the matter to be referred to a Neutral Expert and boycotted the arbitration process. Although the World Bank initially paused both mechanisms, it lifted the hold in 2022 and allowed both to proceed simultaneously—a move India opposed.
Despite India’s non-participation, Pakistan continued engaging with both the tribunal and the Neutral Expert mechanism.
In response to the developments, including India's suspension of the treaty and heightened military tensions, the tribunal sought input from both countries in May 2024. While Pakistan responded, India did not.
In its June 27 order, the tribunal concluded that India’s suspension of the treaty did not affect its jurisdiction or that of the Neutral Expert. Dismissing the tribunal’s conclusion, the MEA asserted that India’s action was within its sovereign rights under international law.
It described the arbitration proceedings as a “charade” orchestrated by Pakistan to distract from its continued support for terrorism and manipulation of international institutions.
New Delhi's sharp rebuke underscores its refusal to engage with or accept any outcome from the arbitration process, even as Islamabad pursues the matter through international legal channels.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment