Reema Shaukat
It needs no justification or clarification that Indian media is expert in creating controversies and culpabilities and later deny the facts smartly. Constructing manipulations on Yadav issue is an old saga now which began when he was captured in March 2016. India has never accepted Pakistan’s creation and time and again certain roguish activities and blame game against Pakistan make captions. On 03 March 2016 an Indian Navy Commander was arrested while crossing Iranian border of Pakistan. Indian spy who was identified as Commander Kulbhushan Yadav was based in the Chabahar, an Iranian dock city and detained in the border area of Baluchistan where he was trying to enter with false identity name as Hussain Mubarak Patel. Upon his arrest he acknowledged himself as a spy of RAW who was assigned special duties to glitch Pakistan’s stability through various means. Later in a confessional video he gave all details of his whereabouts and mischievous acts in which he was involved.
When the case of Kulbhushan Yadav was brought into light and Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan was summoned upon alleged activities of RAW in Pakistan, Indian media as usual turned up in favour of its scapegoat. At that time, The New Indian Express newspaper in their very own report claimed Yadav as a businessman who owned a small ship and had nothing to do with the Indian intelligence agency RAW. But their so claimed statement proved wrong when Yadav confessed about his identity as serving naval officer and admitted that he rendered his services to RAW. Yadav confessed about his involvement in high profile attack in Karachi also. He was supposed to remain in contact with Baloch insurgents and confirmed that Baloch Liberation Army is being funded by RAW. Handlers of RAW wanted that Baloch liberation should come against Pakistan and demand separate land for themselves. He admitted for establishing a network of operators, providing them with funds by RAW and arranging and trafficking people for terrorist activities in Pakistan. He was specifically tasked to carry out bomb blasts and sabotage CPEC by any means. Most of the intelligence operations by him were done in coastal area of Gwadar, Pasni and Jewaani. He self-proclaimed for separation of Karachi and Baluchistan from Pakistan. He also accepted the responsibility of training Baloch separatist terrorists to create chaos and unrest in Pakistan particularly Baluchistan.
Kulbhushan Yadav case was presented in court and in April, 2017 he was given the death sentence after trial for involvement in espionage and sabotage activities in Karachi and Baluchistan. Yadav was tried by the FGCM under Section 59 of the PAA and Section 3 of the official Secret Act of 1923. But India brought this case to International Court of Justice claiming Pakistan’s decision as wrong.
International Court of Justice conducted hearing of self-confessed Indian spy Kulbhushan Yadav’s case from 18 of February to 21 of February 2019, at the Peace Palace in The Hague during which both India and Pakistan submitted their detailed pleas and responses. On 23 January 2017, the ICJ gave a timeline to both Pakistan and India to file another round of memorials in the case. Recently ICJ announced that it will deliver on July 17 its verdict on the Yadav case. There are different possibilities regarding verdict by ICJ. There are less likely chances that case goes in favour of Pakistan and the claim and given proofs of Yadav as spy go null and void. But the reality cannot be changed which is that India is a country which patrons terrorism on foreign soil be it Afghanistan, Sri Lanka or Pakistan as it covertly financed TTP, LTTE, ETIM and other insurgent groups. Proofs of Indian involvement are always exposed but India knows the art of making people fool and believing world in them. Pakistan already has found and exposed India on many fronts for sponsoring terrorism on its soil.
In decision by ICJ, if Yadav is given consular access for which there is a possibility then it is also violation of international law as any spy involved in such dreadful acts is not given consular access. Pakistan already in ICJ provided precedence based on historical courts decisions for espionage cases. Secondly India is the first country in the 60 years history of ICJ that has demanded such a concession from the court in the light of Vienna Convention. Any such concession if provided will not be as per the Customary National Laws or Mutual Bilateral Agreements between both the countries like India and Pakistan have bilateral treaties of 1982 and 2008 and not by ICJ Supposedly if it is accepted that consular access be given as per Vienna Convention even then neither Pakistan is liable to release him nor his trial will be abrogated. Here important thing to note is that till 2017 India did not accept Yadav as Indian citizen but after taking its case to ICJ and demanding for consular it accepted him as Indian citizen which shows Indian frustrations and failures. Another possibility for the case is that ICJ might dismiss case from international court and ask Pakistan to run trial in civil courts instead of military courts which has announced death sentence to Kulbhushan Yadav. Even then it is questionable that credible evidences were provided to ICJ about Yadav where he was declared as Indian military officer, then as per law case should be dealt in military not civil courts.
In past, Pakistan fulfilled its obligations under sub-clause (a) of Article 36(1) by duly notifying India of the arrest and detention of Yadav. Considering International Law, Article 2(4) of United Nations Charter states that, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” And similarly Article 29 of the Hague Regulations 1907 identifies: “A person can only be considered a spy when, acting clandestinely or on false pretences, he obtains or endeavours to obtain information in the zone of operations of a belligerent, with the intention of communicating it to the hostile party.” These clauses make the Pakistan’s standpoint valid and strong in case of Kulbhushan Yadav. However India has always manipulated things at ICJ and this time too chances are that India might get favourable decision from ICJ but Pakistan’s position stand firm on its part.
