Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul><li><keyword id="3001" type="COUNTRY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Pakistan">Pakistan</keyword> has agreed to provide <keyword id="7884779" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="consular-access-to-kulbhushan-jadhav">consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav</keyword> after the verdict of the <keyword id="70191" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="International-Court-of-Justice">International Court of Justice</keyword> (ICJ).</li><li>Yesterday, India had asked Pakistan for Jadhav’s immediate return, after the verdict in <keyword id="3298764" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kulbhushan-Jadhav">Kulbhushan Jadhav</keyword> case was delivered.</li><li>Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar, while speaking in the Parliament yesterday had said that the government will put all efforts to bring Jadhav back to India.</li><li>The ICJ in its verdict had announced that its Pakistan’s obligation to inform Jadhav his rights and allow India to provide counselor access to him.</li></ul>Pakistan has agreed to grant consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, in accordance with the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Foreign Office told IANS sources. In a late night statement, the Pakistan Foreign Office said it has informed Jadhav of his rights to consular access under the Vienna Convention. "As a responsible state, Pakistan will grant consular access to Kulbushan Jadhav according to Pakistani laws, for which modalities are being worked out," it said. After the final verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case yesterday, India had asked Pakistan to immediately release him and vowed to bring the retired Navy officer back. The day before, The International Court of Justice (ICJ) had in its final verdict directed Pakistan to suspend the death penalty on Jadhav given in 2017 for charges of sabotage and espionage. He will also be provided consular access which was denied by Pakistan. “Pakistan was found to have deprived India of the right to communicate with Jadhav, have access to him, visit him in detention, and arrange his legal representation,” S Jaishankar, the Minister of External Affairs (MEA), said speaking at both the houses of Parliament. Jadhav, the 47-year old retired Indian Navy officer was apprehended by Pakistan security forces in Balochistan province of Pakistan. He was charged with espionage, three years back. In April 2017, he was sentenced to death on charges of espionage and terrorism. “Kulbhushan Jadhav is innocent of the charges made against him. His forced confession, without legal representation and due process will not change this reality,” Jaishankar further said. “We once again call Pakistan to release and repatriate him forthwith,” the minister said. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) had yesterday unanimously delivered the judgement that Jadhav must be given judicial representation, by a vote of 15-1. With inputs from IANS

Pakistan bows to the international court and grants Kulbhushan Jadhav consular access

<ul><li>The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has delivered its final verdict in <keyword id="4406260" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kulbhushan-Jadhav-case">Kulbhushan Jadhav case</keyword>, in India’s favour. </li><li>The ICJ had earlier held four hearings in the case in February where both India and Pakistan presented their cases at length. </li><li>Jadhav was apprehended by Pakistan’s security forces in 2016 and was charged with espionage and terrorism. </li><li>In April 2017 Jadhav was sentenced to death by a military court in Pakistan </li></ul> The International Court of Justice today delivered a verdict in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case, in India’s favour. It asked Pakistan to review his conviction and sentence. Jadhav who was arrested three years back in suspicion of being a spy, was also granted consular access which was denied by Pakistan. Jadhav’s death sentence remains suspended until it is reviewed, according to ICJ which delivered this verdict at The Hague. However, it is yet to be known if he can return to India, or even be acquitted off his charges of being a spy. Jadhav, a retired Indian Navy officer was apprehended by Pakistan security forces in Balochistan province of Pakistan. He was charged with espionage, three years back. In April 2007, he was sentenced to death on charges of espionage and terrorism. India took the case against Pakistan’s verdict to the ICJ in May 2017. India claims that Jadhav was denied consular access, which was against the Vienna Convention rules. Both India and Pakistan had signed the Vienna pact. In February, the ICJ held a four day hearing where both India and Pakistan submitted pleas to the along with responses to the questions. Pakistan insisted that the Indian Navy officer was a spy under the Research &amp; Analysis Wing (RAW) and not a businessman. However, India countered these allegations and said that Vienna Convention rules were breached by Pakistan, as they denied consular access to the detained person. India had also questioned the process undertaken to pass the death resolution. It had urged the court to annul Jadhav’s death sentence and sought his immediate release. Pakistan, on its behalf, claimed that Jadhav was arrested by its security forces in March 2016 from Balochistan where he illegally entered from Iran, whereas India insists that he was kidnapped from Iran where he runs a business.

Kulbushan Jadhav’s death sentence is suspended as the International Court of Justice has asked Pakistan to review its verdict

<ul><li>The <keyword id="3019696" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="International-Commission-of-Jurists">International Commission of Jurists</keyword> (ICJ) has joined 1,800 other lawyers calling for the Indian Supreme Court to reassess its standards of criminal contempt after the <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> case verdict. </li><li>The international human rights organisation made up mostly of lawyers and judges claims that the verdict is inconsistent with <keyword id="473565" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="international-standards">international standards</keyword>. </li><li>It argues that, if left unchecked, such convictions could have a “chilling effect” on the freedom of expression in India. </li></ul>The case of two tweets by the lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan that were critical of the Indian judiciary and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is now in the global spotlight. The International Commission of Jurists (<a href="https://www.icj.org/india-icj-urges-review-of-criminal-contempt-laws-after-supreme-court-convicts-human-rights-lawyer-for-social-media-posts-critical-of-judiciary/">ICJ</a>) — an international human rights organisation made up of lawyers and judges — has joined 1,800 Indian lawyers asking India’s Supreme Court to review the standards of criminal contempt as a reaction to Bhushan’s verdict. Left unchecked, the institution argues that there could be a “chilling effect” on the freedom of expression in India. “There is a general concern that the protection of freedom of expression is rapidly eroding in India,” said Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director. Bhushan’s ruling inconsistent with international standards Bhushan was held in criminal contempt of court for going on a public platform, Twitter, to call out the Supreme Court for not doing enough for citizens of the country during the lockdown. <div type="image" title="pjote grid (1)" msid="77885935" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Prashant Bhushan&amp;#39;s tweets &amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> “While the Court only imposed a symbolic fine of one rupee, rather than imprisonment, the ICJ considers that the conviction appears to be inconsistent with international standards on freedom of expression and the role of lawyers”, ICJ said in a statement. International standards refer to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966 that India was a party to — which guarantees the freedom of expression. “While some restrictions of freedom of expression are permitted by international standards, a particularly wide scope must be preserved for debate and discussion about such matters as the role of the judiciary, access to justice, and democracy, by members of the public, including through public commentary on the courts,” it added. ICJ joins 1,800 Indian lawyers Last month, more than <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1B_MDUNwikNs2momE2EV5hh4AoMWeVx31FOMaIpSWcdA/edit#gid=700758088">1,800 members of the Indian Bar</a> — including senior advocates like Sriram Panchu, Raju Ramachandram, Mihir Desai and others— issued a statement criticising the Supreme Court for its verdict. The signatories said, “a silenced bar cannot lead to a strong court.” According to them, just because the judiciary is independent of other functions of the state does not imply that it is exempt from scrutiny. “This judgment does not restore the authority of the court in the eyes of the public. Rather, it will discourage lawyers from being outspoken,” the consortium of lawyers said in their joint statement.

ICJ raises concern on SC decision in Bhushan case — says it’s inconsistent with international standards

<ul><li>A day after the <keyword id="70191" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="International-Court-of-Justice">International Court of Justice</keyword> (ICJ) delivered its verdict in Kulbhushan Jadhav case, India today asked Pakistan for Jadhav’s immediate return. </li><li>Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar, while speaking in the Parliament today said the government will put all efforts to bring Jadhav back to India. </li><li>The ICJ had yesterday announced that its Pakistan’s obligation to inform Jadhav his rights and allow India to provide counselor access to him. </li></ul>After the final verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case yesterday, India today asked Pakistan to immediately release him and vowed to bring the retired Navy officer back. Yesterday, The International Court of Justice (ICJ) had in its final verdict directed Pakistan to suspend the death penalty on Jadhav given in 2017 for charges of sabotage and espionage. He will also be provided consular access which was denied by Pakistan. “Pakistan was found to have deprived India of the right to communicate with Jadhav, have access to him, visit him in detention, and arrange his legal representation,” S Jaishankar, the Minister of External Affairs (MEA), said speaking at both the houses of Parliament. Jadhav, the 47-year old retired <keyword id="6355100" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Indian-Navy">Indian Navy</keyword> officer was apprehended by Pakistan security forces in <keyword id="45793" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Balochistan">Balochistan</keyword> province of Pakistan. He was charged with espionage, three years back. In April 2017, he was sentenced to death on charges of espionage and terrorism. “Kulbhushan Jadhav is innocent of the charges made against him. His forced confession, without legal representation and due process will not change this reality,” Jaishankar further said. “We once again call Pakistan to release and repatriate him forthwith,” the minister said. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) had yesterday unanimously delivered the judgement that Jadhav must be given judicial representation, by a vote of 15-1. The judgement was welcomed across party lines and all thumped the benches as Jaishankar said that the government will vigorously continue its efforts to ensure his safety and well being, and his timely return to India. The ICJ clearly pronounced that the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations was breached by Pakistan as it did not notify India of Jadhav’s detention in time and deprived India of its right to communicate with and provide consular access to Jadhav. It is to be noted that the Court has asked Pakistan to provide for appropriate reparation of its own choice in the case. The minister termed the ICJ verdict as a vindication for not only India and Jadhav but also for all those who believe in the rule of law and respect and work by the international treaties.

Kulbhushan Jadhav is innocent, release him says India’s External Affairs Minister

<ul><li>The <keyword id="70191" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="International-Court-of-Justice">International Court of Justice</keyword> (ICJ) will deliver its final verdict in <keyword id="3298764" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kulbhushan-Jadhav">Kulbhushan Jadhav</keyword> case in the Peace Palace in the Hague today at 3 pm (6:30 pm IST). </li><li>The ICJ had earlier held four hearings in the case in February where both India and Pakistan presented their cases at length. </li><li>Jadhav was apprehended by Pak security forces in 2016 and was charged with espionage and terrorism. </li><li>In April 2017 Jadhav was sentenced to death by a military court in Pakistan.</li></ul>The long awaited verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case is set to be delivered today at 3 pm (06:30 IST) in the Peace Palace in the <keyword id="44173" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Netherlands">Netherlands</keyword>. Jadhav, a retired Indian Navy officer became a bone of contention between India and Pakistan. He was apprehended from <keyword id="45793" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Balochistan">Balochistan</keyword> province of Pakistan, and charged with espionage, three years back. In April 2007, he was sentenced to death on charges of espionage and terrorism. India took the case against Pakistan’s verdict to the ICJ in May 2017. India claims that it was denied consular access to Jadhav, which was against the Vienna Convention rules. Both India and Pakistan had signed the Vienna pact. Today in the ICJ, the verdict will be delivered in a public setting by the President of the UN judicial organ, Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf. Fifteen other judges will also be present and will either concur fully with the final verdict, or read out their supporting or dissenting opinions. A representative of Pakistan will also be present. In February, the ICJ held a four day hearing where both India and Pakistan submitted pleas to the along with responses to the questions. Pakistan insisted that the Indian Navy officer was a spy under the Research &amp; Analysis Wing (RAW) and not a businessman. However, India countered these allegations and said that Vienna Convention rules were breached by Pakistan, as they denied consular access to the detained person. Also, India questioned the process undertaken to pass the death resolution. It urged the court to annul Jadhav’s death sentence and sought his immediate release. Pakistan, on its behalf, claims that Jadhav was arrested by its security forces in March 2016 from Balochistan where he illegally entered from Iran. While India insists that he was kidnapped from Iran where he runs a business. Jadhav’s family was allowed to meet him in Pakistan in December 2017.

The International Court of Justice will decide today if Kulbhushan Jadhav was an Indian spy in Pakistan

<ul><li>The government maintains that this is necessary in view of the ICJ's ruling in June last year, in which it had asked Pakistan to give <keyword id="4434811" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Jadhav-consular-access">Jadhav consular access</keyword> while hearing an appeal filed by India against the death sentence handed to him through a military court trial process. </li><li>However, the opposition parties describes the ordinance as an attempt to facilitate a reprieve for Jadhav, who they call an Indian spy working for Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), in a sneaky manner through a suspected secret deal. </li><li>Major opposition parties are geared up to strongly oppose the ordinance in the Senate, the upper house of parliament, calling it a matter of "national security". </li></ul>The <keyword id="6824371" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="imran-khan-government">Imran Khan government</keyword> is expected to table <keyword id="4533921" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="The-International-Court-of-Justice">the International Court of Justice</keyword> (ICJ) Review and Re-consideration Ordinance 2020 in the National Assembly on Monday, even as it faces intense heat from the opposition on the issue. The ordinance seeks to allow alleged <keyword id="4016237" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Indian-spy-Kulbhushan-Jadhav">Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav</keyword> the facility to file an appeal in a high court against his conviction. The government maintains that this is necessary in view of the ICJ's ruling in June last year, in which it had asked Pakistan to give Jadhav consular access while hearing an appeal filed by India against the death sentence handed to him through a military court trial process. However, the opposition parties describes the ordinance as an attempt to facilitate a reprieve for Jadhav, who they call an Indian spy working for Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), in a sneaky manner through a suspected secret deal. Major opposition parties are geared up to strongly oppose the ordinance in the Senate, the upper house of parliament, calling it a matter of "national security". Passing the ordinance in the lower house has become a major issue for the government as it has failed to present it at least twice in May, due to strong opposition. "We want to be on the right side of the history. The government faces compulsion; we don't have any compulsion," said opposition Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Khawaja Asif. Asif reminded that Prime Minister <keyword id="14676" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Imran-Khan">Imran Khan</keyword> was quick to accuse former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of making a secret deal with Indian businessman Sajjan Jindal on Jadhav during his meeting with him in <keyword id="1958456" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Murree">Murree</keyword>. "Purely political announcements were made by Imran Khan before coming in power in 2018. He did not realise the consequences of his accusations back then," he said. "In May 2017, Imran had told a political gathering at Ayub Stadium in Quetta that the execution of the convicted Indian spy had been withheld after Jindal visited Pakistan and met Nawaz Sharif," he said adding that Imran Khan had even asked the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) constituted to probe the Sharif family's foreign assets to also trace their business interests in India. On the other hand, the government will be taking the matter up in a cabinet meeting before the ordinance is sent to the National Assembly for approval. Federal Law Minister Dr. Farogh Naseem called on the opposition parties to avoid politics on the matter, insisting that "India will gain if an ordinance in line with the ICJ verdict is not passed". "This issue is highly sensitive and a matter of national importance. Promulgation of the ordinance is neither a National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) nor an appeal," he said. While the government has a compulsion to abide by the ICJ ruling, opposition parties are adamant at not allowing the measure easy transit through the legislature. Opposition parties do not have majority in the lower house but they have a clear majority in the upper house, and warn that if the government succeeds in passing the ordinance in the lower house, they will ensure the upper house rejects it. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/health/news/coovid-vaccine-from-oxford-serum-institute-and-astrazeneca-shows-promising-immune-response/articleshow/77069321.cms">The COVID-19 vaccine from Oxford and AstraZeneca shows 'promising' results in early human trials</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/entertainment/news/dil-bechara-kissing-booth-2-and-other-movies-you-can-watch-on-netflix-amazon-prime-disneyhotstar-this-week/slidelist/77142498.cms">Dil Bechara, Kissing Booth 2 and other movies you can watch on Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+Hotstar this week</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/work-from-home-effect-these-companies-are-shelling-out-for-employees-power-bills-internet-cost-and-more/articleshow/77139229.cms">WFH effect – These companies are paying for employees' power bills, internet cost and more</a>

Pakistan to reconsider Kulbhushan Jadhav Ordinance in the National Assembly on August 3

Following is the chronology of events in the sensational 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case in which four death row convicts were hanged Friday morning: Dec 16, 2012: Paramedical student gang-raped and brutally assaulted by six men in a private bus and thrown out of the moving vehicle along with her male friend. The victim is admitted to Safdarjung Hospital. Dec 29: Victim succumbs to injuries and other medical conditions. Police add murder charge in FIR. Jan 2, 2013: Then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir inaugurates fast track court (FTC) for speedy trial in sexual offence cases. Aug 31: JJB convicts a minor for gang-rape and murder and awards three-year term at probation home. Sep 10: Delhi court convicts Mukesh, Vinay, Akshay, Pawan of 13 offences including gang-rape, unnatural offence and murder of the girl and attempt to murder her male friend. Sep 13: Court awards death penalty to all 4 convicts. Mar 13: HC upholds death penalty to the 4 convicts. Mar 15: SC stays execution of 2 convicts, Mukesh and Pawan, after they file appeals. Later, stays execution of other convicts also. Feb 3, 2017: SC says it would hear afresh the aspect of awarding death penalty to the convicts. May 5: SC upholds death penalty to four convicts, says the case falls under the category of 'rarest of rare' and the offence created "tsunami of shock". Nov 8: Mukesh, one of the four death row convicts in the case, moves SC seeking review of its verdict upholding the capital punishment awarded to him. Dec 15: Convicts Vinay Sharma and Pawan Kumar Gupta move SC for review of its verdict. Jul 9: SC dismisses review pleas of three convicts. Feb, 2019: Victim's parents move Delhi court for issuance of death warrants of the four convicts Dec 10, 2019: Akshay moves plea in SC seeking review of his death penalty. Dec 18: SC dismisses Akshay's review plea. Delhi court directs Tihar authorities to issue notice to convicts to avail their remaining legal remedies. Dec 19: Delhi HC dismisses plea of Pawan Kumar Gupta claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence. 
 <div type="image" title="6e03c72236f91f810e936bb2f069daf4" msid="74722489" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;The Nirbhaya Ordeal&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div>



 Jan 6, 2020: Delhi court dismisses complaint filed by Pawan's father seeking FIR against sole witness for allegedly deposing falsely. Jan 7: Delhi court issues death warrants against the four convicts for hanging on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail. Jan 14: SC rejects curative petition of Vinay and Mukesh. Mukesh files mercy petition before President. Jan 17: President Ram Nath Kovind rejects Mukesh's mercy plea. Tihar jail authorities seeks fresh date of hanging, trial court fixes Feb 1, 6 AM for execution. Jan 25: Mukesh moves SC against rejection of mercy plea. Jan 29: Akshay approaches SC with curative petition. SC rejects plea of Mukesh challenging rejection of his mercy plea. Jan 30: SC dismisses curative plea of Akshay. Jan 31: SC dismisses Pawan's plea seeking review of its order rejecting his juvenility claim. Delhi court again postpones execution of the black warrants till further order. Feb 5: HC dismisses Centre's plea against trial court order; says all 4 convicts have to be hanged together. It directs convicts to pursue all legal remedies within a week, failing which the authorities ordered to take action in accordance with law. Centre, Delhi govt move SC challenging HC verdict on hanging of convicts. Feb 6: Tihar authorities move court for fresh death warrants, trial court seeks convicts response. Feb 7: Delhi court dismisses Tihar's plea seeking fresh date for execution of convicts. Feb 11: Vinay moves SC challenging rejection of mercy plea. Victim's parents move Delhi court seeking fresh death warrant for convicts. Feb 13: Pawan refuses lawyer from DLSA as legal aid, jail authorities inform trial court. SC appoints senior advocate Anjana Prakash as amicus to represent Pawan. Vinay claims mental illness in SC, Centre says he has sound mind. Feb 14: SC dismisses Vinay's plea challenging rejection of mercy petition. Feb 17: Mukesh refuses to be represented by advocate Vrinda Grover. Delhi court issues fresh death warrants for March 3. Feb 28: Pawan files curative plea in SC Mar 2: SC dismisses curative petition of Pawan. He files mercy plea. Delhi court defers hanging of 4 death row convicts till further order. Mar 4: Delhi govt moves court seeking fresh date for execution of cnvicts. Mar 5: Delhi court fixes Mar 20 as date of execution of convicts. Mar 6: Mukesh moves SC seeking restoration of his legal remedies. Mar 11: Pawan moves court for FIR against cops for alleged prison assault. Mar 12: Pawan's father moves HC against rejection of complaint for FIR against sole witness. Mar 13: Vinay moves HC claiming procedural lapse in mercy plea rejection. Mar 16: SC rejects Mukesh's plea seeking restoration of legal remedies. 3 death row convicts move ICJ seeking stay on execution. Mar 17: Mukesh moves court seeking quashing of death penalty on claim of not being in Delhi at the time of crime, plea dismissed. Pawan moves SC with fresh curative petition and Akshay files second mercy petition. Mar 18: Mukesh moves HC against trial court's Mar 17 order, plea dismissed. Pawan, Vinay and Akshay seek stay on death penalty, Delhi court issues notice to Tihar, Police. Mar 19: SC rejects curative petition of Pawan. Mukesh moves SC claiming he was not in Delhi on Dec 16, 2012, plea dismissed. Delhi court dismisses plea of Pawan, Vinay and Akshay seeking stay of execution. SC dismisses Akshay's plea challenging rejection of second mercy petition. Mar 20: Delhi HC dismisses plea of three convicts seeking stay on execution, convicts move SC. In a pre-dwan hearing, SC brings down curtain on the case by rejecting plea of Pawan Gupta against rejection of second mercy plea. All four convicts hanged in Tihar jail at 5.30 am.

You Searched For "ICJ verdict" and got 7 results

Pakistan bows to the international court and grants Kulbhushan Jadhav consular access

BI India Bureau

Kulbushan Jadhav’s death sentence is suspended as the International Court of Justice has asked Pakistan to review its verdict

BI India Bureau

ICJ raises concern on SC decision in Bhushan case — says it’s inconsistent with international standards

Prabhjote Gill

Kulbhushan Jadhav is innocent, release him says India’s External Affairs Minister

BI India Bureau

The International Court of Justice will decide today if Kulbhushan Jadhav was an Indian spy in Pakistan

BI India Bureau

Pakistan to reconsider Kulbhushan Jadhav Ordinance in the National Assembly on August 3

IANS

Timeline of the Nirbhaya case — the seven year march to justice

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides