Court rules in Pakistan’s favour in Indus Waters Treaty arbitration case

Pakistan has secured a significant legal and diplomatic victory at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, where the tribunal ruled in its favour in a case related to the Indus Waters Treaty.

According to official sources, the court delivered its decision on 15 May, addressing a dispute over the methodology used to calculate maximum permissible water storage capacity in Indian hydropower projects on rivers governed under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty.

Pakistan had challenged India’s approach, arguing that it allowed excessive water storage beyond the limits permitted under the treaty framework. Islamabad maintained that the methodology used by India was “artificial” and could enable higher-than-permitted reservoir capacity in violation of agreed rules.

LHC converts death sentence into life term in Jhang councillor murder case

Although the ruling has not yet been formally published due to the sensitivity of the case, it is being widely viewed in Islamabad as a major diplomatic and legal success.

A senior official from the Ministry of Water and Power stated that the tribunal accepted Pakistan’s position and ruled that India cannot unilaterally determine storage capacity on the basis of disputed or unverified calculations. The court also emphasized that India is required to provide complete and transparent technical information to Pakistan under the treaty’s provisions.

The case included detailed arguments concerning major Indian hydropower projects, including the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric schemes. Pakistan argued that design features of these projects could impact downstream water flows and exceed treaty limits if not properly regulated.

Officials in Islamabad say the ruling reinforces the legal boundaries of India’s water usage under the Indus Waters Treaty and strengthens Pakistan’s position on future water disputes.

The decision is being hailed as a reaffirmation of international water law principles and a confirmation that unilateral modifications to shared river systems are not permissible under the treaty framework.

Further details of the judgment are expected once the tribunal formally releases the written decision.

e