[Herebelow reproduced is the (complete text of the) press release
issued by the ICJ, on the subject issue, yesterday.

It apparently signifies that India's subject petition has been
admitted for hearing.
But that 's all as yet, as it appears.

Despite the loud claims made by Indian media, in unison, that a "stay"
has been issued.
See, e.g.: 
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/international-court-of-justice-stays-hanging-of-kulbhushan-jadhav/articleshow/58600937.cms>.

The release, of course, reproduces verbatim portions of the Indian
peitition including urging "the Court to deliver an Order indicating
provisional measures immediately", but that's all it appears to have
done. And, the release, in no way, indicates that it has gone beyond
that.

Quite significantly, an explanatory note at the very end of the
release states: "The ICJ, (is) a court open only to States for
contentious proceedings, and to certain organs and institutions of the
United Nations system for *advisory proceedings* (emphasis added) ...]

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/168/19420.pdf

Press Release
Unofficial

No. 2017/16
9 May 2017

*The Republic of India institutes proceedings against the Islamic Republic
of Pakistan and requests the Court to indicate provisional measures*

THE HAGUE, 9 May 2017. On 8 May 2017, the Republic of India instituted
proceedings
against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, accusing the latter of
“egregious violations of the Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations” (hereinafter the “Vienna
Convention”) in the matter of the
detention and trial of an Indian national, Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir
Jadhav, sentenced to death by a
military court in Pakistan.
The Applicant contends that it was not informed of Mr. Jadhav’s
detention until long after
his arrest and that Pakistan failed to inform the accused of his
rights. It further alleges that, in
violation of the Vienna Convention, the authorities of Pakistan are
denying India its right of
consular access to Mr. Jadhav, despite its repeated requests. The
Applicant also points out that it
learned about the death sentence against Mr. Jadhav from a press release.
India submits that it has information that Mr. Jadhav was “kidnapped
from Iran, where he
was carrying on business after retiring from the Indian Navy, and was
then shown to have been
arrested in Baluchistan” on 3 March 2016, and that the Indian
authorities were notified of that
arrest on 25 March 2016. It claims to have sought consular access to
Mr. Jadhav on 25 March 2016
and repeatedly thereafter.
According to the Applicant, on 23 January 2017, Pakistan requested
assistance in the
investigation of Mr. Jadhav’s alleged “involvement in espionage and
terrorist activities in Pakistan”
and, by a Note Verbale of 21 March 2017, informed India that “consular
access [to Mr. Jadhav
would] be considered in the light of the Indian side’s response to
Pakistan’s request for assistance
in [the] investigation process”. India claims that “linking assistance
to the investigation process to
the grant[ing] of consular access was by itself a serious violation of
the Vienna Convention”.
India accordingly “seeks the following reliefs:
(1) [a] relief by way of immediate suspension of the sentence of death
awarded to the accused[;]
(2) [a] relief by way of restitution in interregnum by declaring that
the sentence of the military
court arrived at, in brazen defiance of the Vienna Convention rights
under Article 36,
particularly Article 36[,] paragraph 1 (b), and in defiance of
elementary human rights of an
accused which are also to be given effect as mandated under Article 14
of the 1966
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is violative of
international law and the
provisions of the Vienna Convention[;] and

(3) [r]estraining Pakistan from giving effect to the sentence awarded
by the military court, and
directing it to take steps to annul the decision of the military court
as may be available to it
under the law in Pakistan[;]
(4) [i]f Pakistan is unable to annul the decision, then this Court to
declare the decision illegal being
violative of international law and treaty rights and restrain Pakistan
from acting in violation of
the Vienna Convention and international law by giving effect to the
sentence or the conviction
in any manner, and directing it to release the convicted Indian
National forthwith.”
As the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, the Applicant invokes
Article 36, paragraph 1, of
the Statute of the Court, by virtue of the operation of Article I of
the Optional Protocol to the
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory
Settlement of Disputes of
24 April 1963.
On 8 May 2017, India also filed a Request for the indication of
provisional measures,
pursuant to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court. It is explained in
that Request that the alleged
violation of the Vienna Convention by Pakistan “has prevented India
from exercising its rights
under the Convention and has deprived the Indian national from the
protection accorded under the
Convention”.
The Applicant states that Mr. Jadhav “will be subjected to execution
unless the Court
indicates provisional measures directing the Government of Pakistan to
take all measures necessary
to ensure that he is not executed until th[e] Court’s decision on the
merits” of the case. India points
out that Mr. Jadhav’s execution “would cause irreparable prejudice to
the rights claimed by India”.
India further indicates that the protection of its rights is a matter
of urgency as “[w]ithout the
provisional measures requested, Pakistan will execute Mr. Kulbhushan
Sudhir Jadhav before th[e]
Court can consider the merits of India’s claims and India will forever
be deprived of the
opportunity to vindicate its rights”. The Applicant adds that it is
possible that the appeal filed by
the mother of the accused on his behalf may soon be disposed of.
India therefore requests that, “pending final judgment in this case,
the Court indicate:
(a) [t]hat the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan take all
measures necessary to ensure
that Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav is not executed;
(b) [t]hat the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan report
to the Court the action it has
taken in pursuance of sub-paragraph (a); and
(c) [t]hat the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan ensure
that no action is taken that
might prejudice the rights of the Republic of India or Mr. Kulbhushan
Sudhir Jadhav with
respect of any decision th[e] Court may render on the merits of the case”.


***Referring to “the extreme gravity and immediacy of the threat that
authorities in Pakistan
will execute an Indian citizen in violation of obligations Pakistan
owes to India”, India urges the
Court to deliver an Order indicating provisional measures immediately,
“without waiting for an
oral hearing”. The Applicant further requests that the President of
the Court, “exercising his power
under Article 74, paragraph 4[,] of the rules of the Court, pending
the meeting of the Court . . .
direct the Parties to act in such a way as will enable any Order the
Court may make on the Request
for provisional measures to have its appropriate effects”.*** [Emphasis added.]
___________

Note: The Court’s press releases are prepared by its Registry for
information purposes only
and do not constitute official documents.
The full text of the Application and Request will be available shortly
on the Court’s website
(www.icj-cij.org).
___________

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial
organ of the United Nations.
It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and
began its activities in
April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague
(Netherlands). Of the six
principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located
in New York. The Court has a
twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law,
legal disputes submitted to it by
States (its judgments have binding force and are without appeal for
the parties concerned); and,
second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by
duly authorized United
Nations organs and agencies of the system. The Court is composed of 15
judges elected for a
nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the
United Nations.
Independent of the United Nations Secretariat, it is assisted by a
Registry, its own international
secretariat, whose activities are both judicial and diplomatic, as
well as administrative. The official
languages of the Court are French and English. Also known as the
“World Court”, it is the only
court of a universal character with general jurisdiction.

The ICJ, a court open only to States for contentious proceedings, and
to certain organs and
institutions of the United Nations system for advisory proceedings,
should not be confused with the
other  mostly criminal  judicial institutions based in The Hague and
adjacent areas, such as the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, an ad
hoc court created by the
Security Council), the International Criminal Court (ICC, the first
permanent international criminal
court, established by treaty, which does not belong to the United
Nations system), the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon (STL, an independent judicial body composed of
Lebanese and international
judges, which is not a United Nations tribunal and does not form part
of the Lebanese judicial
system), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA, an independent
institution which assists in
the establishment of arbitral tribunals and facilitates their work, in
accordance with the Hague
Convention of 1899).
___________
Information Department:
Mr. Andrey Poskakukhin, First Secretary of the Court, Head of
Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)
Mr. Boris Heim and Ms Joanne Moore, Information Officers (+31 (0)70 302 2337)
Mr. Avo Sevag Garabet, Associate Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)
Ms Genoveva Madurga, Administrative Assistant (+31 (0)70 302 2396)

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to