India and Pakistan are anxiously awaiting the verdict by the Hague-based International Court of Justice slated for July 17 in the case relating to Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav, who is on death row in Pakistan.
India has contended that Jadhav was kidnapped from Iran where he had business interests after retiring from the Navy. Pakistan has claimed Jadhav was a “spy”. India based its case on two broad issues – breach of the Vienna Convention on consular access and the process of resolution. But Pakistan insisted that he was picked from the restive Balochistan province in March 2016 after he reportedly entered from Iran.
Further, India has sought annulment of Jadhav’s death sentence and his immediate release, saying the verdict by a Pakistani military court was based on a “farcical case” and it failed to satisfy even the minimum standards of due process.
The ICJ verdict is expected to come three days after a meeting slated for July 14 between India and Pakistan at the Wagah border to discuss the draft agreement for finalising the modalities of the Kartarpur corridor. Furthermore, it is also important as the US President Donald Trump will hold his maiden meeting with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan on July 22 to reset strained relations between Washington and Islamabad.
Last month, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi confirmed the exchange of pleasantries between Pakistan PM and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi in Japan on the sidelines of the 19th SCO summit. He declared that Pakistan was ready for talks. But India has reiterated that terror and talks cannot go together.
Moreover, there are two notable examples. Sarabjit Singh, who was given the death sentence on charges of espionage died in an attack by other inmates after languishing in jail for 22 years. On the other hand, Mumbai techie Hamid Ansari was released last year from the Lahore jail after India’s intervention. Against this backdrop, there is a possibility that the ICJ may ask Pakistan to hold a fresh trial of Jadhav.
Experts believe that the administration of justice will not only involve a balancing act between claims and counterclaims but also a strong test of human rights.