ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office on Monday welcomed a decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague to issue a supplemental award in the Indus Waters case.
The ruling urges India to resume the operation of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), which New Delhi has held in abeyance since May.
In April, India suspended the treaty following an attack in the Pahalgam area of Indian-occupied Kashmir, which killed 26 people. India blamed Pakistan for the attack, though Islamabad denied involvement.
Pakistan condemned India’s suspension of the treaty as an “act of war,” highlighting that the IWT contains no provisions allowing unilateral suspension. Islamabad has also threatened legal action, citing violations of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
The PCA’s supplemental award, announced on 27 June 2025, reaffirmed the court’s jurisdiction over the dispute involving Pakistan and India’s hydroelectric projects at Kishenganga and Ratle. The court declared its ongoing responsibility to ensure a timely and fair resolution of the matter.
The Foreign Office described the award as a vindication of Pakistan’s position that the treaty remains valid and operational, and criticised India’s unilateral decision to suspend it.
A statement issued by the Government of Pakistan called on India to “immediately resume the normal functioning of the Indus Waters Treaty and fulfil its treaty obligations.”
It also welcomed the PCA’s ruling on competence, which rejected India’s suspension of the treaty, expressing optimism for the forthcoming award on the merits following hearings held in July 2024.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif reiterated Pakistan’s readiness to engage in meaningful dialogue with India on outstanding issues including Jammu and Kashmir, water, trade, and terrorism.
According to the PCA, the treaty does not allow either party to unilaterally suspend or hold it in abeyance. The court stated such actions would undermine the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms.
The court further noted that India’s position was not justifiable under international law.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.