What Is The Legality Of India's Indus Water Treaty Suspension?

The IWT negotiated between Pakistan and India with the mediation of World Bank has survived four wars.

Indus Water Treaty Edited by
What Is The Legality Of India's Indus Water Treaty Suspension?

What Is The Legality Of India's Indus Water Treaty Suspension?

India has announced the suspension of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) with Pakistan means that India is no longer legally bound to guarantee 80% share of Indus-basin water flow to Pakistan. The IWT negotiated between Pakistan and India with the mediation of the World Bank has survived four wars, however, the Pahalgam terror attack has led to the unilateral suspension of the treaty by India.

However, the 1960 treaty contains no expression for unilateral withdrawal, suspension, or termination. It states that the treaty is ‘to remain in force in perpetuity”. Articles VII-XII contain provisions on dispute settlement and financial provisions.

Read also: How Indus Water Treaty Suspension Will Impact Pakistan

Also, International treaties come under executive powers under Article 73, says that Parliament is not required to withdraw from international treaties unless the rights of citizens are affected. The executive can suspend obligations citing national security.

However, India has used Article 62 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which can make use of fundamental changes in circumstances such as climate change and cross-border terrorism, to invoke the suspension.

Legally, India’s unilateral suspension sits on weak ground as the IWT lacks an exit clause and proclaims perpetual validity. The 1997 UN Convention on Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses stresses the equitable and reasonable use and no harm rule. Also, the International Courts including ICJ held that ecological or political shifts do not easily justify abandoning a water treaty.

Read also: ‘Shaken The Nation’s Conscience’: Supreme Court Condemns Pahalgam Terror Attack

India is leaning on the Vienna Convention doctrines of material breach and fundamental change of circumstances, but international jurisprudence applies these critical resource treaties. India’s obligations are paused but its position would face challenges in any neutral forum making renegotiation an ultimate end.