Islamabad:
Pakistan has officially subjected detailed concerns to the permanent court of arbitration (PCA), accusing India to arm the waters of Western rivers – a serious violation of the 1960s water Treaty (IWT), known as Islamabad.
According to the additional 32 reward on the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration, which currently examines the complaint of Pakistan under TWT, Islamabad has highlighted alarming changes in Indian policy since April 23, 2025.
“Pakistan argues that the” suspension policy “of India since April 23, 2025, as well as public rhetoric, have fueled threats and perhaps the realization of its new approach: to use dams to manipulate or refuse downstream versions in Pakistan”, announces the price.
Explaining what it means by “armaments”, Pakistan has described three main ways of which India could exercise control over the flow of Western rivers, allegedly in violation of the treaty.
“Pakistan recalls that” armaments “in this context concerns three ways of which India can control the waters of Western rivers:” (a) the interruption of water supply used for downstream irrigation by the opening of mothers of the barrier to release water stored in excessive volumes rivers, earth, infrastructure and people living “, notes the price.
On June 27, the International Court made a key decision on its power to hear the case of Pakistan.
The Court judged unanimously: “The position of India according to which it holds the Treaty in` `suspension ”, but this position can be characterized as a question of international law, does not deprive the court of arbitration of jurisdiction.”
The decision develops more, recognizing the point of view of Pakistan according to which the “suspension” position of India is not only rhetorical but actively undergo the obligations of the treaties.
“The International Tribunal in its prize highlighted Pakistan’s response to India’s policy to have the” Abeyance “treaty.”
Directing directly from Pakistan’s submission, the court notes: “The court of his order indicates that, according to Pakistan, the” rhetoric of officials of India and the intimate clamor of the Indian media since April 23, now show that weapons scenarios are far from being hypothetical “.”. “”
The surveillance of the data collected by the Pakistani authorities is also part of the evidence of Islamabad at the Court.
“In addition, on the basis of its surveillance of the flow of Western rivers in Pakistan, Pakistan argues that these” data show that, since the declaration of “abyance” policy of April 23 of India, it acted in the material contempt of operational constraints in paragraph 15 of appendix D, causing an intentionally doubt – “insignificant variation in the flow of the base”.
To support this assertion, Islamabad provided data on the rivers flow showing anomalies after April.
“In support of this assertion, Pakistan provides flow flow data for Chenab when it enters Pakistan, represented as hydrograms, which, according to Pakistan,” show two episodes of significant flow variation, one early May and the second at the end of the month and extending in June “.”
A more in -depth analysis of the data suggests intentional manipulation of the flow of water by India, according to Pakistan.
“According to Pakistan, the” flow variations indicated in these hydrograms are almost certainly the result of the emptying and the filling of the Hep Baglihar tank, involving both its 37.5 mm3 of allocated ponds and, in all risks, a large volume of dead storage as well “, with arcs in sediments indicating” which were both possible fertilizer. “.
Efforts to request clarification with Indian counterparts, says Pakistan, has remained unanswered.
“While the Pakistani commissioner for Industes Waters wrote to the Indian Commissioner for the Waters of the Industry on May 27, 2025 to request an explanation of these peaks, Pakistan indicates that he has received no response to the deposit of the submission of Pakistan,” confirms the prize.
The final evaluation of Pakistan depicts a dark image of the intentions of India under the cover of the “suspension”.
“Consequently, according to Pakistan,” it is clear that, whatever the initial intention, the “suspension” policy of India is now simply covers behind which India acts in violation of its processed obligation. ‘”
The Arbitration Court is chaired by Professor Sean D. Murphy of the United States and includes Professor Wouter Buytaert (Belgium), Professor Jeffrey P. Minear (United States), judge Awn Shawkat al-Khasawneh (Jordan) and Dr Donald Blackmore (Australia).
According to legal observers, the final award on the long -standing complaint in Pakistan concerning the alleged violations of the Treaty of India – in particular concerning design modifications to the Kishenganga hydroelectric factory (KHEP) and at the Ratle Hydroelectric Factory later this summer.
