Newly reappointed Law Minister Farogh Naseem, said on Friday that an ordinance was needed to follow the International Court of Justice’s judgement regarding captured Indian spy Kulbushan Jadhav, so that India could be stopped from approaching the United Nations Security Council.
Speaking on the floor of the National Assembly, Naseem said he wanted to clarify the facts so the opposition could understand the context.
Holding up a copy of the ICJ judgement, the law minister said that the ICJ decided that Pakistan would have to grant [Jadhav] consular access and review and reconsider the case. “It placed an obligation on Pakistan. Paragraphs 144-148 of the judgement showed that ICJ placed the obligation on the country to enact a law for effective review and reconsideration [of the case].”
He said that this was why an ordinance was framed and promulgated. He denied that it was similar to the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). “An NRO is what Gen Musharraf promulgated to forgive sentences and suspend pending proceedings. We have to follow the ICJ’s decision as a responsible state.”
Naseem said that India “wanted that Pakistan not follow the ICJ judgement so that they could approach the UNSC for bringing all kinds of resolutions, sanctions and declare Pakistan a rogue state”.
“We have to follow ICJ decisions as we are a comity of nations. If we do not promulgate this ordinance, then India could use Article 94 of UNSC and Article 60 of ICJ statute. We cut off India’s hands by bringing this ordinance. Pakistan has done this responsibly,” he added.
“When Kulbushan Jadhav was arrested on March 3, 2016, the [then] federal government took a decision that consular access would not be given to him because he was guilty of espionage.”
“I am not playing a blame game but Pakistan could have expressed reservation, gotten out of optional protocol and jurisdiction of the ICJ verdict. But this did not happen and [the government] exercised its discretion.
“The second important date is May 8, 2017 when India filed a case in the ICJ. We were unable to judge [the situation correctly] then.