Pakistan wins key ruling on Indus Waters Treaty

June 28, 2025 (MLN): In a significant legal breakthrough for Pakistan, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague has ruled that India cannot unilaterally suspend or sideline the arbitration process under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), despite India’s recent attempts to do so.

The court underlined that its jurisdiction remains intact, irrespective of India’s declaration to hold the treaty “in abeyance.”

This landmark supplemental award on the court’s competence came as part of arbitration proceedings initiated by Pakistan in 2016 over disputes concerning India’s design of the Kishenganga and Ratle run-of-river hydroelectric projects.

Pakistan maintained that certain elements of these projects, located on tributaries of the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers, violate the treaty’s provisions.

In its unanimous decision, the PCA firmly rejected India’s arguments that its unilateral suspension of the treaty could strip the court of authority.

The tribunal held that once arbitral proceedings are underway, a party cannot later undermine jurisdiction through unilateral moves, a principle well established in international law and consistently upheld by global courts, including the International Court of Justice.

Citing Article XII(4) of the IWT, the court stressed that the treaty remains in force unless both nations jointly agree to terminate it, leaving no room for one-sided withdrawal or suspension.

It also reaffirmed the critical function of the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms, warning that permitting one party to ignore these processes would nullify the treaty’s very purpose.

Importantly, the court ruled that these findings also extend to the Neutral Expert, another avenue of dispute resolution under the treaty, which was appointed in parallel proceedings initiated by India.

This means both the PCA and the Neutral Expert retain full authority to proceed.

Pakistan first brought the matter to arbitration in 2016, challenging India’s hydroelectric project designs.

Around the same time, India requested that the World Bank appoint a Neutral Expert to examine overlapping technical concerns.

The World Bank, which serves a facilitative role under the treaty, paused the appointment process later that year to allow the countries to resolve differences.

This pause was lifted in 2022, enabling the arbitration court to be constituted and the Neutral Expert to be appointed.

Last year, on July 6, 2024, the PCA issued an initial award on its competence, dismissing India’s objections.

Friday’s supplemental award further solidifies the tribunal’s stance, directly addressing India’s more recent assertion that it could suspend its treaty obligations at will.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Saturday hailed the supplemental award issued by the Court of Arbitration on the Indus Waters Treaty, describing it as a powerful endorsement of Pakistan’s position.

In a statement, the premier said the ruling reinforces Pakistan’s stance that India cannot unilaterally suspend the treaty.

“This decision underscores that international agreements cannot simply be violated at will,” he remarked.

Stressing the critical importance of water security, Shehbaz declared, “Water is our lifeline,” and reaffirmed his government’s strong commitment to safeguarding and managing the country’s water resources responsibly.

The prime minister also praised Federal Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar and Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan for steering a robust legal strategy that led to this favorable outcome.

“This is a significant diplomatic and legal victory for Pakistan. We will continue to advocate at all forums to protect the water rights of our people,” he asserted.

Conversely, India outright rejected the PCA’s supplemental award. In a sharply worded statement, India’s Ministry of External Affairs reiterated that it does not recognise the authority of what it described as a “so-called Court of Arbitration,” labelling the proceedings a “charade at Pakistan’s behest.”

India argued that because it considers the treaty to be in abeyance, it no longer views itself as bound by its obligations.

Despite India’s objections, the Hague-based court’s ruling makes clear that the arbitration will proceed.

Copyright Mettis Link News