India Rejects Arbitration Award on Indus Water Treaty (IWT)

Context:

India recently rejected the award issued by the Court of Arbitration (CoA) under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), calling the tribunal “illegally constituted” and its decisions “null and void.” It reiterated that the Indus Waters Treaty remains in abeyance following the 2025 Pahalgam terror attack.

Dispute Related to Hydroelectric Projects

This dispute relates to two hydroelectric projects of India located in Jammu and Kashmir:

Kishanganga Project

• • A 330 MW run-of-the-river hydroelectric project
  • Located on the Kishanganga River, a tributary of the Jhelum River

Ratle Project

• • An 850 MW hydroelectric power project
  • Located on the Chenab River

Pakistan’s position:

Pakistan argues that the design of these projects—particularly their storage capacity and spillways—violates the provisions of the treaty and may reduce the flow of water into Pakistan.

India’s position:

India maintains that both projects fully comply with the technical provisions of the treaty and are purely run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects.

• • Pakistan has violated the treaty process by simultaneously approaching both a Neutral Expert and a Court of Arbitration.
  • The jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal is not valid.
  • Technical disputes should first be resolved through a Neutral Expert.
  • Therefore, India has boycotted the arbitration proceedings.

About Indus Waters Treaty (IWT):

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on 19 September 1960 between India and Pakistan with mediation by the World Bank.

Key Features

Eastern Rivers – Allocated to India

• • Ravi
  • Beas
  • Sutlej

India has unrestricted use of these rivers.

Western Rivers – Allocated to Pakistan

• • Indus
  • Jhelum
  • Chenab

India retains limited rights for:

• • Hydropower generation
  • Non-consumptive use
  • Irrigation under specified conditions

Dispute Resolution Mechanism under IWT

The treaty provides a three-tier grievance redressal mechanism under Article IX.

Permanent Indus Commission (PIC)

• • First level of dispute resolution.
  • Commissioners from both countries discuss technical issues and operational disputes.

Neutral Expert (NE)

• • Handles technical and engineering disputes unresolved by the PIC.
  • Decision is binding on both sides.

Court of Arbitration (CoA)

• • Deals with legal disputes and treaty interpretation.
  • A seven-member tribunal constituted at The Hague.

Key Issues:

Treaty Suspension

The dispute raises questions about whether a bilateral treaty can be unilaterally suspended on national security grounds.

Sovereignty vs Arbitration

India emphasizes that sovereignty and security concerns cannot be separated from treaty obligations.

Climate Challenges

The treaty does not adequately address climate change, glacier melting, and changing river flows.

About Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA):

The Permanent Court of Arbitration was established in 1899 during the Hague Peace Conference for peaceful settlement of disputes among states and international organizations.

• • Headquarters: The Hague, Netherlands
  • Founded under the 1899 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
  • Independent intergovernmental organization
  • Granted Permanent Observer status at the UN General Assembly in 1993

Conclusion:

India’s rejection of the arbitration award reflects broader tensions involving terrorism, sovereignty, and strategic security. The future stability of the Indus basin will depend on sustained diplomacy, institutional dialogue, and cooperative water governance between India and Pakistan.