Addressing the court, Mr Mittal said India had made repeated requests for assistance on consular access, which had been denied and had eventually been told that access would only be given in light of India’s cooperation in the Pakistani investigation.
Mr. Salve accused Pakistan of “egregious violations of the Vienna convention,” right from Mr. Jadhav’s arrest in March 2016. He described as “facetious” a May 12 communication from Pakistan that had outlined the legal avenues open to Mr. Jadhav, noting that it had failed to provide an assurance that the sentence would not be carried out. India relied solely on the Vienna Convention and not the agreement between India and Pakistan on consular access, he said.
Pakistan’s Counsel Khawar Qureshi QC rejected the extreme urgency of the case, arguing that the demand for provisional measures amounted to a “boot straps’ argument. He added that questions over the “palpably false passport” on which Mr. Jadhav was arrested, allegedly in Balochistan, required further explanation.
He also pointed to past hearings where India had sought to challenge the jurisdiction of the court, and questioned the characterization of the 2008 agreement as not relevant. “Serious allegations have been made against a member state of the United Nations and not one jot of evidence has been provided by India,” he said and described India’s allegations that Mr. Jadhav had been kidnapped in Iran as “far fetched.”
COMMents
SHARE