Murali's Writeups...

Prologue 1. In my earlier blog , I dealt with the trivia surrounding the ICJ judgement on Kulbhushan Jadhav’s case. Even after the judgement, expectedly, India and Pakistan are continuing to wrangle on the conditions under which ICJ recognized right of Mr. Kulbhushan Jadhav to have Consular Access and his right to have a counsel of his choice. In some ways it is good because so long as the wrangling continues, Mr. Kulbhushan Jadhav’s right to have a natural death will continue except that he will be enjoying that right in a foreign prison. Surely, in due course, Pakistan will review the conviction and sentence, this time, hopefully in a Civilian Court. But even the Civilian Courts of most liberal nations are looking at the issue of terrorism on a different footing. If and when the Review takes place under Pakistani laws, surely the type of evidence that Pakistan has against Mr. Jadhav will definitely come under Global Scrutiny. One of the pieces of evidence that Pakistan will

1. The recent judgement of the International Court of Justice in the case between the arch-rivals of South Asia has brought a lot of cheers to the family of Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav, the Indian  Ministry of External Affairs and the migrants who were compelled to make a living in foreign lands. The object of this blog is not to analyse the legal niceties and the global implications of this Judgement. Instead, this will focus more on the trivia and other incidental issues that surround the judgement. The International Court of Justice, is an Adjudicatory Court modelled after the ‘Continental or Civil Law System Courts’. To begin with, the Statute of the International Court of Justice itself makes it clear that the judgement of ICJ and the Principles of Law decided by ICJ are binding only on parties to the dispute. It will not bind the third parties. Yet, the ICJ as a court has not been averse to citing passages from earlier judgments made by ICJ and PCIJ. Secondly, since ICJ is a civil