• search
For Quick Alerts
For Daily Alerts

Kulbhushan Jadhav case: Appropriate remedies due in the case, says ICJ


United Nations, Oct 31: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Thursday found Pakistan guilty of violating under Article 36 of Vienna Convention in the case of Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav.

Kulbhushan Jadhav case: Appropriate remedies due in the case, says ICJ

Presenting the report of the International Court of Justice to the 193-member General Assembly on Wednesday, the bench led by Abdulqawi Yusuf said in its judgement of July 17 the principal judicial organ of the United Nations "found that Pakistan had violated its obligations under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention and that appropriate remedies were due in this case."

Verdict on Kulbhushan Jadhav eased Indo-Pak tensions: ICJ chief

In a major victory for India, the ICJ had ruled in July this year that Pakistan must review the death sentence awarded to Jadhav, a retired Indian Navy officer who was sentenced to death by the Pakistani military court on charges of "espionage and terrorism" after a closed trial in April 2017.

The bench led by Yusuf had ordered an "effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav."

Yusuf elaborated on several aspects of the Court's ruling in Jadhav's case while presenting his report to the General Assembly.

He said one of the issues that the Court had to examine was the question of whether the rights relating to consular access, set out in Article 36 of the Vienna Convention, were in any manner to be excluded in a situation where the individual concerned was suspected of carrying out acts of espionage.

"The Court noted in that regard that there is no provision in the Vienna Convention containing a reference to cases of espionage; nor does the Article concerning consular access, Article 36, exclude from its scope certain categories of persons, such as those suspected of espionage. Therefore, the Court concluded that Article 36 of the Vienna Convention was applicable in full to the case at hand," he said.

The Court was also called upon to interpret the meaning of the expression "without delay" in the notification requirements of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. The Court noted that in its case, the question of how to determine what was meant by the term "without delay" depended on the given circumstances of a case.

"Taking into account the particular circumstances of the Jadhav case, the Court noted that Pakistan's making of the notification some three weeks after Mr Jadhav's arrest constituted a breach of its obligation to inform India's consular post "without delay", as required by the provisions of the Vienna Convention," he noted.

He further said that "another interesting legal question" that the Court had to address was whether a bilateral agreement on consular access concluded between the two Parties - India and Pakistan - in 2008 could be read as excluding the applicability of the Vienna Convention.

"The Court considered that this was not the case," he said. "More precisely, the Court noted that under the Vienna Convention, parties were able to conclude only bilateral agreements that confirm, supplement, extend or amplify the provisions of that instrument. Having examined the 2008 Agreement, the Court came to the conclusion that it could not be read as denying consular access in the case of an arrest, detention or sentence made on political or security grounds, and that it did not displace obligations under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention."

Coming to the "crux" of the Court's ruling, he said the Court considered the reparation and remedies to be granted after it had found that the rights to consular access had been violated.

Reject as inadmissible, Pakistan tells ICJ in Kulbhushan Jadhav case

"In line with its earlier jurisprudence in other cases dealing with breaches of the Vienna Convention, the Court found that the appropriate remedy was effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr Jadhav."

Yusuf told the General Assembly that the Court moreover clarified what it considered to be the requirements of effective review and reconsideration.

It stressed that "Pakistan must ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in the Vienna Convention and guarantee that the violation and the possible prejudice caused by the violation are fully examined."

"While the Court left the choice of means to provide effective review and reconsideration to Pakistan, it noted that effective review and reconsideration presupposes the existence of a procedure that is suitable for this purpose and observed that it is normally the judicial process that is suited to this task."

Yusuf said that following its ruling, the Court received a communication dated August 1, 2019, from Pakistan, confirming its commitment to implementing the July 17 judgment in full.

"In particular, Pakistan stated that Mr Jadhav had been immediately informed of his rights under the Vienna Convention and that the consular post of the High Commission of India in Islamabad had been invited to visit him on August 2, 2019," Yusuf said.

India had welcomed the verdict of the International Court of Justice, saying that the ruling of the court by a vote of 15-1 upheld India's position in the case.

Article 36 of Vienna Convention states:

1.With a view to facilitating the exercise of consular functions relating to nationals of the sending


(a) consular officers shall be free to communicate with nationals of the sending State and to have

access to them. Nationals of the sending State shall have the same freedom with respect to

communication with and access to consular officers of the sending State;

(b) if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay, inform the

consular post of the sending State if, within its consular district, a national of that State is arrested or

committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is detained in any other manner. Any communication addressed to the consular post by the person arrested, in prison, custody or detention shall be forwarded by the said authorities without delay. The said authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of his rights under this subparagraph;

(c) consular officers shall have the right to visit a national of the sending State who is in prison,

custody or detention, to converse and correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation. They shall also have the right to visit any national of the sending State who is in prison, custody or detention in their district in pursuance of a judgement. Nevertheless, consular officers shall refrain from taking action on behalf of a national who is in prison, custody or detention if he expressly opposes such action.

2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be exercised in conformity with the

laws and regulations of the receiving State, subject to the proviso, however, that the said laws and

regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purposes for which the rights accorded under this article are intended.

(with PTI inputs)

For Daily Alerts
Get Instant News Updates
Notification Settings X
Time Settings
Clear Notification X
Do you want to clear all the notifications from your inbox?
Settings X
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes cookies from third party social media websites and ad networks. Such third party cookies may track your use on Oneindia sites for better rendering. Our partners use cookies to ensure we show you advertising that is relevant to you. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Oneindia website. However, you can change your cookie settings at any time. Learn more