The Hague: In a huge win for India, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, today stayed the execution of former Navy officer Kulbhushan Jadhav and affirmed his right to consular access.

It also slammed Pakistan for breaching obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

Harish Salve, the lawyer in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case, said that it was his upbringing and India’s tradition which stood in his way of replying to them in their language.

Here are the key highlights from today’s verdict on Kulbhushan Jadhav case:

  • The court, unanimously, found that it has the jurisdiction, on the basis of Article I of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963, to entertain the Application filed by India on 8 May 2017.
  • It rejected the objections, by fifteen votes to one, raised by Pakistan to the admissibility of the application of India and found that the application was admissible.
  • The Court found that by not informing Kulbhushan Jadhav, without delay, of his rights under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under that provision.
  • By not notifying the appropriate consular post of India in Pakistan without delay of the detention of Kulbhushan Jadhav and thereby depriving India of the right to render the assistance provided for by the Vienna Convention to the individual concerned, Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
  • Pakistan deprived India of the right to communicate with and have access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation, and thereby breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
  • The Court also found that the appropriate reparation, in this case, consists in the obligation of Pakistan to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Kulbhushan Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Convention, taking account of paragraphs 139, 145 and 146 of this Judgment.
  • The Court declared, by fifteen votes to one, that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Kulbhushan Jadhav.
  • It is to be noted that the minority vote, in this case, was of the Pakistani judge.

Composition of Court: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Cançado Trindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa; Judge ad hoc Jillani; Deputy-Registrar Fomété.

Pakistan had raised three objections to the admissibility of India’s application. ICJ rejected all the three objections that were based on India’s alleged abuse of process, abuse of rights and unlawful conduct.