PTI raises questions over govt’s failing at world court

ISLAMABAD - The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Thursday asked the government to explain its position on the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) decision to stay the execution of Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav while raising several questions.

The PTI has also demanded from the prime minister to reply its questions and give an explanation in the parliament.

“Why did Pakistan not appoint an ad-hoc judge in ICJ which we had a right to do so,” said PTI Secretary Information Shafqat Mahmood while raising the points. In his second question, he said: “Why did the Foreign Office not take legal advice before initiating official correspondence to concerned quarters?”

“Why did Pakistan choose a London Queen’s council who is Qatar-based? In his fourth question, the PTI secretary information said, “Why did we choose a lawyer who has not a single international law case to his credit he ever contested?” ”Why did we choose a lawyer who has never argued a case independently before the ICJ. Why did we send a first-year associate from the Attorney General office instead of AG to the ICJ?”

“Why did we not submit a written defence before 15 May,” he asked in his last question seeking an explanation from the ruling party.

Mehmood also demanded from PM to disclose all details of his ‘coward’ meetings with Indian business tycoon Sajjan Jindal.

He said that the ICJ’s decision was a clear outcome of the rendezvous of PM Nawaz with his Indian friend Jindal.

He said that questions were frequently raised over the stance of Pakistan on the jurisdiction of ICJ and added that the impression was gaining ground that the government deliberately adopted an irresolute and fragile strategy in this matter.

Slamming the PM, he stated that apprehensions regarding the decision come true. “Secluded decisions, as well as shrouded national security and defence policies, are lethal for the country.” He argued that the PTI urged PM not to make individual decisions and also stressed to make decisions in the parliament instead. National security, defence and foreign affairs demand more subtlety and austerity, he said. 

In a separate video message, PTI leader Shireen Mazari condemned the government for its poor strategy on the case. “Pakistan could withdraw acceptance of jurisdiction before ICJ as well as from the Protocol of Vienna Convention on Council and Relations which unfortunately it did not do so,” she said adding that the court has focused on this convention in its decision. And if the government had decided to contest the case, then it should have well prepared, she said.

“Our lawyers did not argue the issue of urgency,” she deplored. She suspected that the government wanted to hand over Jadhav to India and this was the outcome of Jindal’s meeting with the PM. She called Jadhav a prized asset for India being a master spy.