NEW DELHI: India said Pakistan’s arguments on
Kulbhushan Jadhav ’s case in the
International Court of Justice (
ICJ) on Monday were “contradictory” and “inconsistent” on facts and on legal aspects, failing to meet the points raised by
Harish Salve
for a stay on
Jadhav
’s execution.
Sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court , India had rushed to the international court on May 9 and got its president to write to Pakistan not to alter the status quo till it heard both countries on the interim relief sought by New Delhi.
During the arguments, India, through Salve, pointed to gross violation of the Vienna Convention by
denial of consular access to Jadhav and the sham investigation and trial.
Sources told TOI that Pakistan’s response was muted to most of the allegations made by India.
“Salve showed that Pakistan had granted conditional access to Jadhav by linking this case to an unrelated issue. But during the argument, Pakistan said the convention did not apply to spies of one country arrested by the other and this had been agreed to in a bilateral agreement. Only one fact could be correct, either access to Jadhav could be granted, conditional or otherwise, or it was barred. Both cannot be true,” a source said.
When India expressed concern over Jadhav’s impending execution, Pakistan’s counsel argued that it was a red herring as the law provided for 150 days clemency period for any condemned prisoner in the country, the source said.
“However, Salve rightly pointed out that on the one hand Pakistan was citing the legal provision prescribing the clemency period available to Jadhav, while on the other hand, it kept reiterating that the country would take stringent steps to punish spies from enemy countries,” the source further said.
Pakistan also cited non-establishment of Jadhav’s identity as an Indian national as the reason for denial of consular access to him.
However, Salve showed the international court’s bench a copy of the FIR that was registered against Jadhav describing him as a former commander of the
Indian Navy. “Salve asked how there could be any confusion about Jadhav’s identity,” the source said.
Instead of squarely addressing the points made by India, Pakistan attempted to project before the international court that it was a victim of India-sponsored terrorism.
“But the ICJ bench
rejected Pakistan’s request to play the video containing Jadhav’s alleged confessional statement,” the source said.