In response to the cowardly terror attack in Pahalgam, India has taken swift action to downgrade diplomatic ties with Pakistan and put the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. While the practical implications of this move are not yet clear, it is critical from an international law perspective. The term abeyance is not commonly used in international law; essentially, India has suspended IWT until Pakistan ceases its support for terrorism in India. Since IWT does not allow for unilateral suspension, India appears to justify this action by referencing Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969, which regulates the interpretation, implementation, and application of international treaties.

A key question is whether Article 62 of VCLT provides sufficient legal basis for India’s action or other legal justifications may be applicable. This inquiry is crucial because invoking the correct principle of international law will enhance the legitimacy of India’s position and highlight Pakistan’s unlawful actions. According to Article 62 of VCLT, unilateral termination of an international treaty is permissible if there is a “fundamental change” in the circumstances that formed the essential basis for consent to be bound by........

© hindustantimes