New Delhi: Political analysts and legal luminaries have welcomed the decision of International Court of Justice (ICJ) to stay the execution order against Kulbushan Jadhav passed by a Pakistani military court, asserting that the world body has “clear and compulsory” jurisdiction in such matters.

On Tuesday, ICJ had admitted India’s plea against Jadhav’s death sentence and told Islamabad to hold off on the execution till the case was decided.

Legal experts believe it is wrong to allege that India has reversed its approach on ICJ of not involving it in bilateral issues.

“Yes, this is the first time in 45 years that New Delhi has gone to the world court established by the United Nations charter. But earlier in 1971, India had questioned the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s powers to decide Pakistan’s complaint about New Delhi denying its airlines from flying over India. So when it is really required, international intervention is sought,” Delhi-based legal expert Rajinder Tyagi said.

Experts feel ICJ has a clear jurisdiction in such bilateral disputes, and particularly the current one involving Jadhav.

“In 1999, Islamabad had also taken New Delhi to ICJ over India shooting down an Atlantique plane of Pakistan navy flying over Rann of Kutch. This incident occurred in August, 1999 just around the Kargil war. At that time, India told ICJ it had no jurisdiction in the matter. And ICJ upheld India’s position,” political analyst Sumit Dasgupta told Gulf News.

In the current case, India requested ICJ to ensure that Jadhav’s death sentence was suspended and declared a violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

“The ruling is binding on Pakistan. The court is likely to take up the case next on May 15. Both India and Pakistan have signed up for the ‘Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, 1963,’ which says that such disputes are within the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court,” says political analyst Ravish Gupta.

Legal expert Nitin Joshi does not think India approaching ICJ will open a can of worms and affect relations between India and Pakistan.

“If India has approached ICJ, it means it respects the body. It is true that Pakistan may now take up the Kashmir issue to ICJ but that possibility cannot be allowed to prevent India from making efforts to save its citizen. Forced confession under duress does not anyway hold in any civilian court of law,” Joshi said.

Experts also believe that Pakistan should honour the decision of ICJ.

“It is the duty of world community to force Pakistan to honour the decision of ICJ. Since Pakistan and India cannot resolve their differences mutually, it is better that a third party is involved which can adjudicate between the two. Both can bring their cases against each other in ICJ and let the truth be judged by them,” Tyagi said.

Pakistan has been claiming that Jadhav was arrested from Balochistan on March 3, 2016 and that he entered Pakistan through Iran. India maintains that Jadhav was on a business trip to Iran when he was kidnapped and taken to Balochistan.