مضمون کا ماخذ : کڑک
WBs dam arbitration pause seems to be in Indias favour
ISLAMABAD: Former law minister and expert on international law Barrister Ahmer Bilal Soofi has said that the recent announcement of the World Bank for a pause in the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) to allow the two countries to consider alternative ways to resolve their disagreements seemed in the favour of India. He expressed these views […]
ISLAMABAD: Former law minister and expert on international law Barrister Ahmer Bilal Soofi has said that the recent announcement of the World Bank for a pause in the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) to allow the two countries to consider alternative ways to resolve their disagreements seemed in the favour of India.
He expressed these views on Wednesday at a public talk on ‘Pakistan-India: Avoiding a Water War’, organised by the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), under its distinguished lecture series.
Barrister Soofi, while responding to different queries, said that on September 26, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi threatened to revoke the IWT, which was a serious issue. He said that perhaps it was the first time in modern history that such a high-level government representative threatened to revoke the treaty.
He said that India was using water as a weapon and showing an irresponsible behaviour. He said that according to the agreement, control over the three eastern rivers – the Beas, the Ravi and the Sutlej – was given to India, while control over the three western rivers – the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum – was given to Pakistan.
He suggested that engineers and lawyers in Pakistan should put their heads together to interpret the IWT. “Young scholars and lawyers should be encouraged to study water laws and develop their expertise in this area.”
Barrister Soofi stated that every dispute should be looked at from five different viewpoints: customary international law, judicial decisions, academic writings, international organisations and other treaties.
He said that although the IWT had its governing text, there were other treaties and their texts having customary value governing this treaty as well. “It is also imperative to understand that not every water issue falls under this treaty’s jurisdiction. Other water security issues should be tabled separately and bilaterally.”
He also highlighted that the termination of this treaty could not be done unilaterally, according to Article 12(4) of the IWT.
Barrister Soofi pointed out that the IWT was a regulatory framework giving technical specifications. “It is confined to these technicalities and does not address the substantive decision of the number of dams that the Indian government may wish to construct.”
ISSI Board of Governors Chairman Khalid Mahmood said that the water security was a very important issue. “Being one of the most water scarcest countries and an agricultural economy, the stakes for Pakistan are high.”
He said that it was, therefore, absolutely imperative that Islamabad should make use of all diplomatic means to ensure that this problem was brought to the international community’s notice.
