ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf has demanded from the Prime Minister to explain the outcome of ICJ’s proceeding s on India’s plea against Kalbhushan Jadhav’s conviction by Pakistani Court. Central Secretary Information Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf Shafqat Mehmood has demanded PM to disclose all details of his coward meetings with Indian businessmen Sajjan Jindal.
In a statement issued by Central Media Department Shafqat Mehmood has raised seven critical questions on the matter and sought explanation from the Prime Minister. He demanded that PM should come before the House to explain why Pakistan did not appoint an ad hoc judge it had a right to and why the Foreign Office did not take legal advice before initiating correspondence on the issue. Also why the government has selected a lawyer who has not a single international law case reported from the U.K. Supreme Court and what was the reason to engage London Queen’s Counsel (QC) who was based in Qatar? He further pressed the Prime Minister to explain why his government assigned the task to a lawyer who has never argued a case independently before International Court of Justice and what compelled his government to send a first year associate from Attorney General’s Office instead of AG himself to ICJ. Seeking an explanation on why the government did not submit a written defence before 15 May, Shafqat Mehmood asked that today’s decision is a clear outcome of the rendezvous of Nawaz Sharif and his Indian friend Jindal.
Shafqat Mehmood has stated that questions were frequently raised over the stance of Pakistan on the jurisdiction of ICJ and added that the impression is gaining ground that the government deliberately adopted an irresolute and fragile strategy in this matter. Slamming Nawaz Sharif he stated that apprehensions regarding the decision come true. Shafqat Mehmood said that secluded decisions, shrouded national security and defense policies are lethal for the country. He argued that PTI urged PM not to make individual decision and also stressed to make decisions in the Parliament instead. National security, defence and foreign affairs demand more subtlety and austerity, he added. Furthermore he stated that consultation and national consensus on issues of sensitive nature can abate vulnerability.