A court of arbitration at The Hague ruled unanimously that India cannot unilaterally suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, rejecting New Delhi’s legal arguments for holding the six-decade-old water-sharing pact in abeyance. The five-member court found that the agreement remains fully in force, delivering a major legal victory to Islamabad while intensifying a diplomatic standoff over transboundary rivers.
The Hague Ruling on the Indus Waters Treaty
The court examined every ground cited publicly by New Delhi—including national sovereignty, cross-border terrorism, demographic growth, clean-energy needs, and climate change—and found that no rule of international law allows a state to unilaterally suspend an international treaty.
Pakistan initiated the proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in March 2026, seeking a legal determination on the pact’s status after India announced its decision to place the agreement in abeyance in April 2025. Hearings took place at the Peace Palace in The Hague from April 26 to 28, 2026, with only Pakistan participating. India rejected the jurisdiction of the court and did not attend the proceedings.
Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar welcomed the decision in a statement posted on X, stating that the award decisively rejects India’s attempt to sideline the agreement. Ahmer Bilal Soofi, an international law expert and former Pakistani caretaker federal law minister, told Al Jazeera that the ruling provides Islamabad with a clear legal basis to consider countermeasures under international law.
India Rejects Verdict and Demands Action on Terrorism
Within hours of the announcement, India’s Ministry of External Affairs rejected the verdict, labeling the court as illegally constituted.
India initially placed the treaty in abeyance following the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians. New Delhi attributed the attack to The Resistance Front, which Indian officials describe as a proxy for the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba. Government sources emphasized that while India is not currently looking to exit the treaty entirely, it retains the sovereign right to terminate agreements that conflict with national interests.
Furthermore, Indian government sources dismissed Pakistan’s claims regarding water scarcity. They argued that Pakistan loses substantial portions of its water supply due to inadequate storage infrastructure, widespread leakages, and domestic provincial disputes, rather than actions taken by India.
Future of Regional Water Diplomacy
The Hague ruling establishes a clear legal precedent under international arbitration, yet its practical application remains limited by New Delhi’s refusal to recognize the court’s jurisdiction.
Keep reading