THE HAGUE: Pakistan presented its concluding arguments in a case pertaining to Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) today (Thursday).
Pakistan Foreign Office Spokesman Dr Mohammad Faisal spoke to media after the hearing and said that Pakistan hopes that justice is served for the sake of those affected by Jadhav’s terrorism across Pakistan.
FO spokesman said that Pakistan’s counsel Khawar Qureshi presented a comprehensive case before the court, which listened patiently to it.
He said that India has not responded about the passport issue and didn’t present any evidence in this regard.
India replied to Pakistan’s submissions on Wednesday — the third day of the four-day hearing in the United Nations court, formally known as ICJ. The court is expected to announce its judgement by summer this year.
Pakistan presented its side on Tuesday and maintained that India has not responded to several key questions raised by Islamabad.
English Queen’s Counsel Khawar Qureshi said the case does not engage the Vienna Convention as India failed to establish that Jadhav is it’s national.
Stating that “a decision regarding Jadhav’s nationality has not yet been made”, Qureshi said, “India did not state whether he is Kulbushan Jadhav or Hussain Mubarak Patel.”
“How can India demand consular access when it did not confirm Jadhav’s nationality?” he questioned. “India should tell why the consular access agreement does not apply to Jadhav.”
Pakistan’s counsel said that India knew that if it comes to the issue of consular access then it would have to cooperate with Pakistan. “Which is why India directly approached the ICJ,” he added.
“On one side, India has moved the world court and on the other side it has refused to answer Pakistan’s questions,” Qureshi said. “India is sitting on a weak wall of lies just like Humpty Dumpty,” he added.
Qureshi continued, “I have represented India in the past and this attitude of India is completely new for me.”
“India leveled a baseless allegation against Pakistan of violating international laws,” the counsel maintained. “India’s claim of Jadhav retiring at the age of 47 is beyond comprehension.”
He further said, “As per the Vienna Convention, there is a forum to move the high court in the case.”
India’s spy agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) began to destabilise Balochistan when [Narendra] Modi came into power, he continued. “What investigation did India carry out after Jadhav was arrested from Iran?” he further asked.
Questioning why “Jadhav was in possession of a passport in the name of a Muslim”, Qureshi asked, “What evidence is there of the allegation that Jadhav was kidnapped from Iran and brought to Pakistan?”
“What evidence does India have of the nine-hour trip between Iran and Pakistan?” he further asked.
The counsel continued, “A passport in the name of Hussain Mubarak Patel was issued in 2003 and renewed in 2014. The address mentioned on the passport is that of the property owned by Jadhav’s mother.”
He clarified, “Iran has nothing to do with the Jadhav case. Jadhav was arrested from Balochistan and not Iran and the story regarding his kidnapping from Iran is baseless.”
Qureshi also gave an electronic presentation in the world court and presented excerpts from Indian journalists’ Karan Thapar and Parween Swami’s reports published in April 2017 and January 2018.
Referring to India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval’s interview, Qureshi said, “Doval confessed to Indian-sponsored terrorism in Balochistan during his interview.”
“According to Doval, Jadhav played a key role in terrorism in Balochistan,” he added.
In his concluding remarks, Qureshi maintained that the ICJ should dismiss the Indian petition as the case is out of the jurisdiction of the Vienna Convention.
“India’s application should be declared inadmissible by reason of India’s conduct in this context, manifesting abuse of rights, lack of good faith, illegality, lack of clean hands and misrepresentation,” he stated.