NEWS: Kulbhushan Jadhav Case to Be Heard by The Three–Judge Bench
ISLAMABAD: On Friday, Islamabad High Court head petition filed by the government to appoint a legal representative for Kulbhushan Jadhav. To which decision was taken by the Islamabad High Court to set up a larger bench to hear the case.
The new Three-judge bench includes Chief Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Amir Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Auranzgeb. That will be hearing the case on 3rd September, 2020.
Earlier, the court heard the petition filed by the Pakistan government to appoint a lawyer for Kulbhushan Jadhav. It also named three senior lawyers as amici curiae in Jadhav’s case as it ordered the Pakistan government to give “another chance” to India to appoint a counsel for the death-row prisoner.
Kulbhushann Jhadav was sentenced to death by Pakistani military court on charges of espionage and terrorism in April 2017.
Therefore India approached International Court of Justice against Pakistan challenging the death sentence. Which ruled, that Pakistan must undertake an “effective review and reconsideration” of the conviction and sentence of Jadhav and also to grant consular access to India without further delay.
India claims that, Pakistan has blocked all the ways for an effective remedy available to India in the case while noting that centre has so far requested consular access to Jadhav for 12 times over the past one year.
Now, Pakistan claimed that it had asked India to appoint a counsel for Jadhav. To which, India denied that it was not in knowledge to them
Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Aisha Farooqui said “After the directions of the Islamabad High Court of 3rd August we have contacted the Indian side through diplomatic channels and conveyed the same“, also that, “We are awaiting Indian response,” she added.
However, in New Delhi, External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Anurag Srivastava said, “We have not received any communication from Pakistan on the issue.” Further, he adds that “Pakistan is not only in violation of the judgment of ICJ, but also of its own ordinance.“