Pakistan loses Kishanganga case at The Hague | Pakistan Today

Pakistan loses Kishanganga case at The Hague

The International Court of Arbitration at The Hague has upheld India’s right to divert water from the Kishanganga hydroelectric project in Kashmir. Islamabad had proposed the establishment of a court of arbitration and the appointment of a neutral expert to resolve the dispute in November 2009. Pakistan objected to the construction of the Kishanganga project, which is called Neelum River in Pakistan. In a partial award announced in the Kishanganga dispute, the Hague-based Court of Arbitration allowed India to divert only a minimum flow of water from Neelum/Kishanganga River for power generation. The Indian government had sought full diversion of the river water, but the court determined that India was under an obligation to construct and operate the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant (HEP) in such a way as to maintain a minimum flow of water in the river at a rate to be determined by the court in its final award. The final award will be announced in December this year. The court asked India and Pakistan to provide data by June so that it could determine the minimum flow of water. Pakistan had put two questions, which were legal in nature, before the tribunal – whether India’s proposed diversion of the Neelum/Kishanganga River into another tributary breaches India’s legal obligations owed to Pakistan under the treaty and whether under the treaty, India may deplete or bring the reservoir level of a run-of-river plant below the dead storage level in any circumstances except in the case of an unforeseen emergency. On the second question, the court determined that except in the case of an unforeseen emergency, the treaty did not permit reduction below the dead storage level in the reservoirs of run-of-river plants on the western rivers. It further said the accumulation of sediment in the reservoir of a run-of-river plant on the western rivers did not constitute an unforeseen emergency that would permit depletion of the reservoir below the dead storage level for drawdown flushing purposes.


  1. Harinder said:

    A lesson for Pakistan… learn to think and read the treaty before making a fool of yourselves in front to the world.
    So the KishanGanga project will be there as per the plan, on the same location as plan and with the same capacity as per plan… what did Pakistan got ???????
    Foolish arrogant people…wasting everyone's time.

  2. Dipak said:

    I thought the Pakistani official who ran away to Canada was very clear about the situation. The Kishenganga dam is per IWT of 1960.

  3. Concerned & affected said:

    Yes The corrupt official who ran to Canada took enough to live comfortably for long and let so many suffer and die thirsty. India went back on written accord a repeated performance. Indians are known for strong lobbying in Hague thus managed to bluff and fool the world. …

    So sad world eyes are closed on this and why not send neutral judges ?/

    • wonderer said:

      Neutral Judges?
      How do you know they were not?
      The problem with people like you is you cannot be graceful in defeat.

      • Kabeer said:

        The judgment shows biasness, India doesn’t have the control on Kashmir Valley, If the Kashmiri were happy and glade with the pathetic Indian Government they were not doing what they have been doing since the invasion, freedom is the birth right of every Kashmiri native not the outsiders who have been living in the Kashmir coming from the different parts of the India, they are depriving Kashmires to live the life as they wish to live. If India arranges an election in Kashmir they will lose their government. I can bet on it.

        • gp65 said:

          Your post is irrelevant. The Indus Water Treaty was signed in 1960 after the KAshmir dispute had already been submitted to the UN. The presence of he dispute does nothing to dilute the validity of the agreement. Pakistan was also not questioning the agreement per se simply saying that India was violating it. Well the arbitration panel has ruled that it was not.

  4. shahid said:

    by winning this case,india proved that it have full control over the kashmir valley and she is a integral part of india..

  5. JUMAN said:


  6. Sidster said:

    The case has been decided finally after Indian Government back pedaling on the treaty. The decision is a bitter sweet because it the treaty India does have the right to use water from Pakistani designated river but only for run of the river project. Indian government thought that Pakistan will not be able to put together a case in front of IAC but we did and won a decision. For India, the decision mean the they will only make a tunnel only for the capacity of the project and not for the entire water flow that travels into Pakistan. Well do e Pakistan.

  7. Anon said:

    Everything is a conspiracy …
    So we are taught …
    Only if Pakistan invested like India's on water resource management projects …

  8. Muqaddam said:

    What a cry baby! Remember, it was Pakistan who went for arbitration and had a full choice to approve the arbitrators

  9. gp65 said:

    The Indus Water Treaty provides for neutral arbitration. It is Pakistan that took India to arbitration court. The neutral arbitrator needs to be approved by both countries.

    If Pakistan was convined that arbitration would not be fair, why did it spend millions in contesting the case?

    Your argument is not sound.

Comments are closed.