Pakistan is hopeful of a favourable decision from the Court of Arbitration (CoA) against construction of the controversial Kishanganga Hydroelectric project (KHEP) by India in occupied Kashmir, as the Hague based court on Saturday unanimously stopped India from carrying out construction of any permanent works on or above the Kishanganga River bed at the Gurez site.
Pressure on India: An official source said it was the second victory of Pakistan in the CoA against the controversial Indian project as the court previously accepted Pakistan’s legal position to hold a hearing on the case. The restrictions imposed by the court on India by stopping construction on the river bed would delay completion of the project. “Now the pressure is on India, as previously it was using delaying tactics instead of defending its case in the court”.
India had sought time till November during the August hearings to give its reply. However, stopping further construction would force India to swiftly submit replies to the court to clarify its position. “The provision of approaching the international court, kept in the Indus Water Treaty 1960 for resolving different issues between two riparian, has proved beneficial in the treaty implementation”, he said, adding India would have to take Pakistan into confidence on other planned projects on the western rivers, which under the treaty were given to Pakistan.
Pakistan’s demand for justice: Renowned water sector expert Arshad H Abbasi said if the KHEP was built as planned in Indian held Kashmir then water inflow in Neelum Jhelum would significantly reduce. He put the loss in hydel power generation for the under construction Neelum Jhelum Hydel power plant in Pakistani Kashmir at $141 million per annum based on the current inflows in both rivers.
He said the environment cost would be high as India could put the water of Kishanganga through a tunnel in the Wular Lake that would increase the water flow in Jhelum River, affecting the low lying population living along the river. Pakistan will also loose $74.1 million per annum as it will not be able to implement three hydel power projects of 21 MW Tobat, 21 MW Khel and 255 MW Dhudial. “Pakistan, as a law abiding and peaceful nation, adopted a legal course of action by approaching the CoA after India violated the treaty. Pakistan wants justice in line with the decisions made by the CoA”.
The CoA passed a unanimous order on Pakistan’s application for interim measures on the construction of KHEP in Indian-held Kashmir in which the court ruled that India will not proceed with the construction of any permanent works on or above the Kishanganga river bed at the Gurez site that may inhibit the restoration of the flow of the river to its natural channel.
Joint inspections: The court further ruled that Pakistan and India will arrange for periodic joint inspections of the dam site at Gurez to monitor the implementation of the court’s order. Pakistan had sought halt to the work order as well as an order that any steps India had taken or might take in respect of the KHEP were taken at its own risk, without prejudice to the possibility that the court might order that the works might not be continued, modified or dismantled.
Pakistan further sought that India be ordered to inform the court and Pakistan of any imminent and actual developments on the KHEP that may adversely affect the restoring of the status quo ante or that may jeopardise Pakistan’s rights and interests under the treaty. In January, and again in March, Pakistan required India to provide an undertaking that in so far as it was proceeding with the construction of the KHEP it would be doing so at its own risk, in accordance with established principles of international law.
At India’s own risk: India had refused to provide any such undertaking and thus adherence to this principle was a relief sought by Pakistan in its interim measures application. During the recent hearing, India agreed to the ‘proceed at its own risk’ principle, which has been noted by the court in its order. India, on the construction of the tunnel and power house, may proceed at its own risk without prejudice to the possibility that the court may in its final decision order that the works may not be continued, be modified or dismantled. In addition, the court said it will remain actively seized of the matter. The team of legal experts from Pakistan and abroad that have successfully presented Pakistan’s case continue to work hard on this important matter and are optimistic that the Court of Arbitration will deliver a favourable decision on the merits of the case.
Bundle of lies and wishful interpretations. Another fake claim of victory. Read the judgement you will know. It is just like in Baghlihar Dam where Pakistan govt decalred celebrations of victory but later on someone read full judgement and were shocked to learn how they were misled. Some exceprts; India can “continue with all works” related to the Kishanganga hydro-electric project in Jammu and Kashmir except any permanent work on the riverbed that may inhibit restoration of the river’s full flow”. India “could proceed with the construction of the sub-surface foundations” of the dam, “erect temporary cofferdams and operate the by-pass tunnel it has said to have completed”, “temporarily dry out the riverbed of the Kishanganga-Neelum at the Gurez valley” and “excavate the riverbed.”
The interim ruling further said India “may utilise the temporary diversion tunnel it is said to have completed at the Gurez site, and may construct and complete temporary cofferdams to permit the operation of the temporary diversion tunnel.”
The chest beating being done by these so called water-experts of Pakistan is nothing more than drama and will result only in embarassment and further deterioation of relationship. It will give some publicity and diversionary delusions. India is very well within its right to build dams with minor conditions and India is excercising its rights.
Comments are closed.