New Delhi: After a long wait following the judgement by the International Court of Justice, India on Monday for the first time got the consular access to Kulbhushan Jhadav and Deputy High Commissioner Gaurav Ahluwalia met Jhadav at a sub jail for two hours.
Though India accepted Pakistan’s offer of consular access to Jhadav hoping that Islamabad ‘will ensure right atmosphere so that the meeting is free, fair, meaningful and effective in keeping with the letter and spirit of the ICJ orders, it is still unclear if any Pakistani diplomat was present in the room when the meeting took place.
After India rejected the first proposal for consular access, Pakistan came up with a second proposal for consular access and made it public on Sunday.
Islamabad had first sent the proposal for consular access on July 30th but was rejected as it was partial consular access and New Delhi called on Islamabad to provide full consular access in an ‘environment free from the fear of intimidation and reprisal, in the light of the orders of the international court of justice(ICJ).’
According to the Vienna Convention, Article 36, “Consular officer shall be free to communicate with nationals of the sending State and to have access to them’, and the fact that a Pakistani officer will be present means Pakistan is contravening the convention.
ICJ had declared that Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Jadhav without further ‘delay of his rights.’
The court unanimously found that it had jurisdiction in the case and by a vote of 15-1, pronounced its verdict.
Meanwhile, MEA spokesperson Ravish Kumar said that the pressure on Jadhav during his meeting with the Deputy High Commissioner was amply clear. “While we await a comprehensive report, it was clear that Shri Jadhav appeared to be under extreme pressure to parrot a false narrative to bolster Pakistan’s untenable claims,” he said. “We will decide a further course of action after receiving a detailed report from our Cd’A (Charge d’ Affaires, High Commission of India) and determining the extent of conformity to the ICJ (International Court of Justice directives.”