International Court of Justice (ICJ), finds application of Republic of India admissible. Consular Access granted and the Court considers that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Jadhav.<\/p>\n
15:1 Verdict.<\/p>\n
Following is the operative part of the Judgment pronounced:<\/span><\/p>\n THE COURT,<\/strong> Finds that it has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article I of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963, to entertain the Application filed by the Republic of India on 8 May 2017;<\/p>\n (2) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n Rejects the objections by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the admissibility of the Application of the Republic of India and finds that the Application of the Republic of India is admissible;<\/strong><\/p>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (3) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n Finds that, by not informing Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without delay of his rights under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under that provision;<\/strong><\/p>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (4) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Finds that, by not notifying the appropriate consular post of the Republic of India in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without delay of the detention of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav and thereby depriving the Republic of India of the right to render the assistance provided for by the Vienna Convention to the individual concerned, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (5) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan deprived the Republic of India of the right to communicate with and have access to Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, to visit him in detention and to arrange for his legal representation, and thereby breached the obligations incumbent upon it under Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c), of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;<\/strong><\/p>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (6) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n Finds that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav without further delay of his rights and to provide Indian consular officers access to him in accordance with Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations;<\/strong><\/p>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (7) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n Finds that the appropriate reparation in this case consists in the obligation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to provide, by the means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, so as to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Convention<\/strong>, taking account of paragraphs 139, 145 and 146 of this Judgment;<\/p>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani;<\/p>\n (8) By fifteen votes to one,<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Declares that a continued stay of execution constitutes an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n IN FAVOUR: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Can\u00e7adoTrindade, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa;<\/p>\n AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Jillani.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" International Court of Justice (ICJ), finds application of Republic of India admissible. Consular Access granted and the Court considers that a continued <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":210313,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1188,2],"tags":[36667,36666,17301],"class_list":["post-217009","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hot_off_the_press","category-news","tag-article-36-of-vienna-convention-on-consular-relations","tag-consular-relations","tag-kulbhushan-jadhav"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n(1) Unanimously,<\/p>\n