THE HAGUE — The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) has determined that arguments presented regarding a “fundamental change of circumstances” or lawful “countermeasures” fail to meet the legal requirements under international treaty law to suspend or terminate the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT).
The tribunal emphasized that the IWT was designed to remain operational even during armed conflict and confirmed that India’s unilateral declaration of “abeyance” cannot restrict the Court’s jurisdiction. Key takeaways from the proceedings include:
Rejection of Fundamental Change Claims: The Court evaluated arguments concerning demographic shifts, clean energy needs, infrastructure technology, cross-border terrorism, and climate change, finding that none satisfied the legal conditions for invoking a fundamental change of circumstances.
Unlawful Countermeasures & Human Rights: Ruled that requirements for lawful countermeasures were not met, noting that terminating or suspending the treaty would breach obligations to protect fundamental human rights and preclude established dispute settlement mechanisms.
Jurisdiction and Abeyance: Following India’s decision to place the IWT in abeyance in April 2025, the Court issued a Supplemental Award on Competence ruling that unilateral declarations of abeyance do not limit its competence over the dispute.
Procedural History & Next Steps: After Pakistan initiated proceedings in August 2016 and filed a fresh application on March 4 to determine the treaty’s present legal status, the Court directed Pakistan to file a written memorial after India declined to respond to invitations to participate.
