'No jurisdiction': India rejects 'illegal' Court of Arbitration's Indus Waters Treaty award
The Ministry of External Affairs rejected a supplemental award issued by the Court of Arbitration (CoA) constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), calling the tribunal "illegally constituted" and asserting it has "no jurisdiction whatsoever" to rule on India's sovereign decisions.
The award held that India's decision to place the IWT in abeyance does not limit the Court's competence over the dispute and that the treaty remains fully in force, directing India to continue observing its obligations under it.
The dispute concerns the Kishenganga (330 MW, on the Kishenganga/Neelum, a Jhelum tributary) and Ratle (850 MW, on the Chenab) hydroelectric projects, which Pakistan had challenged as violating the treaty's design specifications for the western rivers.
India stated it has never appeared before the Court and does not recognise its existence in law, reiterating that the abeyance of the IWT — announced after the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack — remains in force.
Indus Waters Treaty (1960) — Structure and Water Allocation
The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on September 19, 1960, between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank as a signatory guarantor of the process. It allocates the three Eastern Rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej (mean annual flow ~33 million acre-feet) — for India's unrestricted use, and the three Western Rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab (~80 million acre-feet) — primarily to Pakistan, while permitting India limited non-consumptive uses (domestic, agriculture, and "run-of-the-river" hydropower subject to design restrictions) on the western rivers.
The current dispute over the Kishenganga and Ratle projects stems directly from Pakistan's objection that their design violates the western-rivers restrictions written into the treaty, which triggered the arbitration process now being rejected by India.
Article IX — Three-Tier Dispute Resolution Mechanism
Article IX of the IWT establishes a graded dispute-resolution architecture: "questions" are first taken up by the Permanent Indus Commission (one Commissioner from each country, meeting periodically); if unresolved, "differences" on specified technical matters (Annexure F) go to a World Bank-appointed Neutral Expert; and only if a matter is not resolved at that stage — or is not a Neutral Expert-type technical difference — does it become a formal "dispute" referable to a Court of Arbitration under Article IX(5)/Annexure G.
India's "no jurisdiction" rejection rests on this Article IX architecture — it argues the Court of Arbitration was convened in a manner inconsistent with the treaty's own sequencing, making its supplemental award legally void as far as India is concerned.
Treaty Abeyance and Article XII — Termination/Modification Clause
Article XII(4) of the IWT states the treaty "shall continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty" between the two governments — the IWT text contains no express provision for unilateral "suspension" or "abeyance." India nonetheless announced the treaty's abeyance on 23 April 2025, a day after the Pahalgam terror attack, linking restoration to Pakistan "credibly and irrevocably" ending cross-border terrorism.
Key Details
- Pahalgam attack: 22 April 2025, in which terrorists killed 26 people in the Baisaran meadow
- India's abeyance announcement: 23 April 2025, via the Ministry of External Affairs
- Legal commentary notes India has invoked customary international law principles (such as those reflected in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, on fundamental change of circumstances/material breach) rather than any express IWT clause, since the treaty itself does not recognise "abeyance" as a category
- India is not a party to the VCLT, though it accepts several of its provisions as reflecting customary international law
The Court of Arbitration's award directly challenges this abeyance, asserting the treaty remains "fully in force" — India's rejection of the award is thus simultaneously a rejection of the Court's competence and a reaffirmation of the abeyance's continuation.
- Indus Waters Treaty signed: 19 September 1960, brokered by the World Bank
- Rivers to India (Eastern): Ravi, Beas, Sutlej — ~33 million acre-feet/year
- Rivers to Pakistan (Western): Indus, Jhelum, Chenab — ~80 million acre-feet/year
- Disputed projects: Kishenganga (330 MW, Jhelum tributary) and Ratle (850 MW, Chenab)
- Pahalgam terror attack: 22 April 2025; India announced IWT abeyance: 23 April 2025
- Dispute resolution ladder under Article IX: Permanent Indus Commission → Neutral Expert (technical) → Court of Arbitration (legal dispute)
- India has never appeared before or recognised the Court of Arbitration constituted in this matter