India has firmly rejected the recent award issued by the Hague-based Court of Arbitration (CoA) under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), citing the court's lack of jurisdiction, legitimacy, and competence.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal emphasised that India has never accepted the legality, legitimacy, or competence of this court, labelling its pronouncements as "without jurisdiction, devoid of legal standing," and having no bearing on India's rights to utilise the waters of the Indus River system.

This rejection comes in response to the Court's August 8, 2025, award, which dealt with interpretations concerning run-of-river hydroelectric projects by India on the Western Rivers, specifically relating to the Kishenganga and Ratle projects situated in Jammu and Kashmir.

India's position remains that the Indus Waters Treaty stands suspended or in abeyance since April 22, 2025, following the Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives.

The suspension of the treaty was a sovereign decision taken by India based on Pakistan's ongoing support for cross-border terrorism, and India insists that the treaty's reinstatement is conditional upon Pakistan's verifiable cessation of such support.

India accused Pakistan of manipulating the treaty process and using the arbitration mechanism as a deceptive effort to deflect global accountability for its role as a sponsor of terrorism.

MEA described the Court's proceedings as a "charade at Pakistan's behest" and warned that Pakistan must permanently renounce terrorism before India considers resuming its obligations under the treaty.

The Court of Arbitration's award emphasised that India's hydroelectric projects must strictly adhere to the design and operational criteria stipulated by the treaty and that India must "let flow" the waters for Pakistan's unrestricted use, with only narrowly construed exceptions for hydroelectric power generation.

Despite India’s objections and refusal to participate in the arbitration, citing the Court's illegal constitution and lack of jurisdiction, the Court held that its rulings are final and binding on both parties.

This legal dispute relates intricately to the hydroelectric projects built by India on the Western Rivers that Pakistan claims reduce water flow downstream.

Pakistan initiated the arbitration process in 2022 to challenge certain design elements of these projects after unsuccessfully pursuing the neutral expert mechanism, which India had favoured for dispute resolution per treaty provisions.

India continues to assert that the dispute resolution mechanisms must be adhered to according to the treaty's framework, favouring the Neutral Expert process over the Court of Arbitration, which was constituted without mutual consent and thus considered in violation of the treaty by India.

The Court of Arbitration comprises five members from various countries, chaired by Professor Sean D. Murphy of the United States, and delivered a unanimous award except for one section decided by a 4-1 majority.

The Court remains seized of the ongoing matters concerning the projects and will determine next steps after consulting both parties.

India categorically rejects the authority and decisions of the Court of Arbitration under the Indus Waters Treaty, asserting that the treaty is suspended due to Pakistan's cross-border terrorism.

India links any reinstatement of treaty obligations to Pakistan ceasing support for terrorism and views the current arbitration as a strategic legal ploy by Pakistan to deflect responsibility. The dispute highlights the fragile state of the Indus Waters Treaty regime amid broader geopolitical tensions between the two countries over water rights and security issues.

Based On ANI Report