KULBUSHAN JADAV CASE COMMENTARY

AUTHOR – DEVANADHAN R, STUDENT AT SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW, THE TAMILNADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI

BEST CITATION – DEVANADHAN R, KULBUSHAN JADAV CASE COMMENTARY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 4 (3) OF 2024, PG. 583-588, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT:

The Jadhav Case (India v. Pakistan) revolved around Pakistan’s arrest, detention, conviction, and death sentence of Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, who India claimed as an Indian national. Jadhav was convicted by Pakistan for terrorism and espionage. This case marked the third time the International Court of Justice (ICJ) addressed the interpretation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR). Unlike previous cases concerning consular rights, India sought more extensive relief, including the annulment of Jadhav’s conviction, his release from detention, and his safe return to India. The ICJ, with only Judge ad hoc Jillani dissenting, unanimously confirmed its jurisdiction and found that Pakistan had violated VCCR Article 36. Specifically, Pakistan had failed to inform Jadhav promptly of his consular rights, did not notify the Indian consular post in Pakistan of his detention, and denied India the right to communicate with Jadhav, visit him, and arrange for his legal representation. The Court ruled that Pakistan must immediately inform Jadhav of his rights and allow Indian consular officers access to him. The Court also determined that Pakistan must provide a means for effective review and reconsideration of Jadhav’s conviction and sentence to address the rights violation. Finally, the ICJ, with Judge ad hoc Jillani dissenting, stated that a continued stay of execution was essential for ensuring an effective review and reconsideration of Jadhav’s conviction and sentence.

KEYWORDS: Consular Rights, Jurisdiction, Provincial Measures, jus cogens.