India Rejects Hague Court Ruling on Indus Waters Treaty, Says Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction
India has firmly rejected the latest ruling by the Hague-based Court of Arbitration on the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), arguing that the tribunal has no jurisdiction to pronounce on India’s sovereign decisions. The Ministry of External Affairs said India has never recognised the existence or authority of the arbitration court involved in the proceedings.
The Court of Arbitration ruled on August 31 that the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty remains fully in force and that India cannot unilaterally suspend or terminate its obligations under the agreement. The ruling directly challenges New Delhi’s decision to place the treaty in abeyance following the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack.
India, however, maintains that its decision to keep the treaty in abeyance remains valid. The MEA described the arbitration body as “illegally constituted” and said its pronouncements, whether past or future, will have no effect on India’s actions concerning its water and hydroelectric projects.
The Hague ruling also imposed interim restrictions on construction activity at the Ratle hydroelectric project in Jammu and Kashmir. Certain work on the dam wall and power intake structure has been restricted pending the outcome of proceedings involving a World Bank-appointed Neutral Expert, whose decision is expected by July 2027.
The dispute has its roots in Pakistan’s challenge to India’s handling of hydroelectric projects on the western rivers covered by the treaty. Pakistan had approached the arbitration mechanism after India increased work and reservoir-related activity at projects in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Indus Waters Treaty, brokered by the World Bank and signed in 1960, survived several wars and decades of India-Pakistan hostility. It allocates the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas and Sutlej—primarily to India, while Pakistan receives the principal use of the western rivers—Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, subject to specified Indian rights. The system is particularly critical for Pakistan, where the rivers support a major share of agricultural activity.
The latest confrontation therefore goes beyond the Ratle project. It has created a fundamental disagreement over whether the treaty can be suspended in response to security concerns and, equally importantly, which dispute-resolution mechanism has legal authority to decide that question.
Pakistan has welcomed the Hague ruling as a reaffirmation of the treaty’s continuing legal force. India’s outright rejection, meanwhile, means the ruling is unlikely to immediately resolve the dispute and could deepen the broader diplomatic confrontation over water, Kashmir and treaty obligations.
