India on Wednesday strongly justified its decision to move the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the case of Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav, sentenced to death in Pakistan for alleged spying, saying he had been subjected to a sham trial and that his life was in danger.
reuters/representational image
India took the step 46 years after it had last approached the ICJ to resolve a dispute with Pakistan.?
The ICJ, which asked Pakistan to stay Jadhav's execution, is to hear the case in detail on Monday and could issue an interim order. India argued that repeated denial of consular access was a violation of Jadhav's rights under the Vienna Protocol and Bagley said his parents's application to visit Pakistan went unanswered.?
AP
India also dismissed suggestions that moving the ICJ could prompt Pakistan to seek third-party interventions on issues related to the J&K dispute. Sources here said the government had only invoked limited jurisdiction in Jadhav's 'Won't Open Door For Pak To Seek J&K Mediation' India in ICJ after 46 yrs: Govt says sham trial forced hand case since both countries are party to Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR).
Indian authorities highlighted that, like India, Pakistan too was a signatory to the Optional Protocol to VCCR on settlement of disputes which allowed ICJ the jurisdiction to hear disputes related to the interpretation of the convention.
Also Read:?As ICJ Stays Pak Court's Order On Jadhav's Execution, Here's A Timeline Of His Curious Case
The protocol calls upon signatory countries to abide by any decision taken by the ICJ on disputes related to denial of consular access to people who have imprisoned abroad.
India's representative at The Hague, lawyer Harish Salve, said Pakistan, despite claiming that the ICJ has overstepped its jurisdiction, will have to consider the consequences of violating the order.
"If Pakistan dares to breach the directive to hold its hand till a formal hearing on India's plea, it will be inviting dangerous consequences as the issue will then be taken up by the UN Security Council," he said.
bccl
Also Read:?Pakistan Says ICJ 'Crossed All Limits' In Kulbhushan Jadhav Case, India Trying To Distract
India believes its petition on Jadhav before the ICJ in no way impinges on Kashmir and other outstanding issues with Pakistan, which could only be resolved bilaterally.
The Jadhav petition, officials said, was about Pakistan's "egregious violations'' of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) in not allowing India consular access to Jadhav and in awarding him death sentence.
reuters/representational image
India is party to the ICJ but with several exceptions, including that disputes involving states which are a member of the Common won't fall under the purview of ICJ. Salve explained that issues like trade or Kashmir would not figure before the ICJ, and pointed out that the Jadhav case related to the Vienna Convention and the violation of the Indian national's rights. Pakistan, however, has already declared that its domestic laws will take precedence over VCCR in Jadhav's case.
On access to Jadhav, Pakistan has said it will prefer to go by the bilateral agreement on consular access signed on May 21, 2008 which, it says, clearly stipulates that in security-related cases, access would be decided on merit.?