ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has several legal options in response to the recent unprecedented decision taken by the Indian government, which revokes article 370 of its constitution, stripping India Held Kashmir (IHK) of its special status.
The other day, India revoked IHK’s special status and rushed through a presidential decree in an attempt to fully integrate its only Muslim-majority region with the rest of the country, hours after imposing a major security crackdown on the region. . In response, Pakistan quickly rejected the decision, declaring it a violation of the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as Kashmir is an internationally recognized dispute. Legal observers believe that in order to deal with the recent situation that arises from the Indian government movement, Pakistan may adopt several legal options.
First, it can approach the UNSC that exercises jurisdiction in both chapters 6 and 7 of the United Nations Charter on “disputes” and “situation” that may endanger international peace and security, said Ahmer Bilal Sufi, principal lawyer of the Supreme Court. He said that what India has been doing in terms of military accumulation and constitutional amendment constituting both a dispute and a situation that could endanger the peace of South Asia and, therefore, the Security Council should take note of these events. . Ahmer, an expert in international law, said the UN secretary general must be informed of these events, as he has a mandate under an independent resolution of 1998 to update the measures that India and Pakistan have taken.
“These are still important legal forums and Pakistan can try, after the appropriate task, to also consider approaching the UN General Assembly,” Ahmer Bilal told The News. In addition to these options, he believed that some research was necessary to explore whether the International Court of Justice (ICJ) could be addressed or not. In addition, he said that Pakistan can also insist on the special session of the ICO and the SCO.
Ahmer Bilal said that Pakistan also needs to approach the relevant capitals of the world, since the Indian violation of international law and bilateral treaties and its own constitution is clear and evident.
Shah Khawar, another senior expert in international law, said ICJ is the main UN tribunal that resolves international legal disputes filed by states. He said he also presents advisory opinions as referred by the UN. “Pakistan cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the ICJ to unilaterally resolve the current scenario created by India, which is outside the jurisdiction of the ICJ,” Shah Khawar said.
Referring to the current situation created by India, Shah Khawar said that Pakistan can approach the UNSC to intervene and force India to refrain from its nefarious designs that can endanger the war between two nuclear countries.
On the Kashmir dispute, Shah Khawar said that the Pakistani government should address this issue before the ICO to pressure India to behave and not jeopardize the regional peace and human rights of observers.
“Apart from this, the Pakistani government must send special envoys to friendly countries and especially to the permanent members of the UN Security Council to press against India,” Khawar said.
Meanwhile, the defender of the Supreme Court of India, Akhil Sibal, said that if there is a rule of the president (in IHK), how does that work? Does it meet the requirement? “That in my opinion would be the legal fault line,” he said.
Malavika Prasad, a constitutional lawyer, said: “How did the IHK government agree with the changes if the state has been under the presidential government for a year now?” of lawyers in New Delhi is already working on a possible petition, said a lawyer.
The Supreme Court of India is the likely place for petitions against the government’s revocation of the state’s special rights, they said. There could also be legal objections to related Indian government legislation regarding the division of IHK into two entities …….