NEW DELHI: India on Tuesday welcomed the ruling of the World Bank appointed neutral expert That said, differences between India and Pakistan over the Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects in J&K fall within their purview under the Indus Waters Treaty.
The government sees this as a vindication of its position and interpretation of the treaty, as it does not recognize or participate in the parallel and “illegally constituted” treaty. arbitration court procedures are being carried out at the request of Pakistan.
In an official statement on the neutral expert’s decision, the government also said that it remains in touch with Pakistan for the amendment and revision of the IWT. Last year India cited cross border terrorism as one of the reasons for requesting a review of the treaty.
“India welcomes the decision taken by the neutral expert under paragraph 7 of Annex F of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. The decision confirms and vindicates India’s position that the seven issues referred to the neutral expert in relation to Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, are differences that fall within their competence according to the treaty,” the government said.
India was upset that even though the World Bank had asked both countries to find a mutually acceptable way to examine Pakistan’s objections to the projects, Islamabad had unilaterally sought a parallel process to address the issue. The government said India’s “consistent and principled” position has been that the neutral expert is the only one who has the jurisdiction, under the treaty, to decide these differences.
“Having confirmed his own competence, which is consistent with India’s view, the neutral expert will now proceed to the next (substantive) phase of his proceedings. “This phase will culminate in a final decision on the merits of each of the seven differences,” he said.
“Being committed to preserving the sanctity and integrity of the treaty, India will continue to participate in the neutral expert process so that differences are resolved in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Treaty, which does not provide for parallel proceedings on the same treaty. set of issues. For this reason, India does not recognize or participate in the proceedings of the illegally constituted Arbitration Court.”