WNAM MONITORING: The Permanent Court of Arbitration, based in The Hague, Friday noted that the decades-long water-sharing pact between India and Pakistan does not have a provision for the unilateral “abeyance” or “suspension” and that the court had jurisdiction over disputes under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT).
The ruling, welcomed by Islamabad but rejected by New Delhi, called the “Supplemental Award of Competence,” came concerning the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in the Indian-administered Kashmir.
In its “unanimous decision,” the court found that India’s decision to unilaterally put the World Bank-brokered treaty in “abeyance” does not limit its competence over the dispute, said a statement for the Permanent Court of Arbitration.
New Delhi put in abeyance the 1960 water-sharing agreement in April after an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir left 26 people dead.
According to the statement, the court first considered the terms of the IWT, “which do not provide for the unilateral ‘abeyance’ or ‘suspension’ of the Treaty.”
The statement added that the court found that it “was not open to India to take unilateral action to suspend these proceedings…”
“Rather, according to its (IWT) terms, the Treaty continues in force until terminated with the mutual consent of India and Pakistan… The Court found that the terms of the Treaty… do not allow either Party, acting unilaterally, to hold in abeyance or suspend an ongoing dispute settlement process, given that to do so would fundamentally undermine ‘the value and efficacy of the Treaty’s compulsory third-party dispute settlement process’,” the statement explained.
The water-sharing agreement between the longtime nuclear rivals was brokered by the World Bank in September 1960. The treaty fixed the rights and obligations of both countries concerning the use of waters of the Indus River system.
The agreement divided the six rivers of the Indus Basin between the two countries.
While India received the three eastern rivers – Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi – Pakistan was assigned control over the three western rivers: Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab.
Pakistan welcomes, India rejects
Pakistan welcomed the ruling, observing that the court has affirmed its competence in light of recent developments and that unilateral action by India cannot deprive either the court or the neutral expert of their competence to adjudicate the issues before them.
“The high priority, at this point, is that India and Pakistan find a way back to a meaningful dialogue, including on the application of the IWT,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said, adding it was waiting for the court’s further rulings.
India, for its part, rejected the ruling, terming it a “brazen violation” of the IWT.
The Foreign Ministry in New Delhi said in a statement that India “never recognized the existence of this so-called Court of Arbitration.”
“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,” it added.
