Jadhav Case (India v. Pakistan) concerned Pakistan's arrest, detention, conviction, and death sentence of Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, asserted by India to be an Indian national, who had been convicted of engaging in acts of terrorism and espionage in Pakistan. This is the third dispute over the interpretation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) to come before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In contrast to the Applicants in the previous consular rights cases, India sought relief that included the annulment of Jadhav's conviction in Pakistan, his release from custody, and his safe transfer to India. After unanimously finding it had jurisdiction, fifteen judges of the ICJ, with only Judge ad hoc Jillani dissenting, held on the merits that Pakistan had breached VCCR Article 36 by failing to inform Jadhav without delay of his rights under that provision; by failing to notify without delay the appropriate consular post of India in Pakistan of his detention; and by depriving India of its right to communicate with Jadhav, to visit him in detention, and arrange for his legal representation. In addition, the Court, with only Judge ad hoc Jillani dissenting, found that Pakistan is under an obligation to inform Jadhav of his rights without further delay and is obliged to provide Indian consular officers access to him. The Court further found that appropriate reparation required Pakistan to provide, by means of its own choosing, effective review and reconsideration of Jadhav's conviction and sentence to ensure that full weight is given to the effect of the violation of his rights. Finally, the ICJ, again with Judge ad hoc Jillani dissenting, declared that a continued stay of execution constituted an indispensable condition for the effective review and reconsideration of Jadhav's conviction and sentence.

中文翻译：

---

Jadhav 案（印度诉巴基斯坦）

Jadhav 案（印度诉巴基斯坦）事关巴基斯坦逮捕、拘留、定罪和判处 Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav 死刑，印度声称他是印度国民，因在巴基斯坦从事恐怖主义和间谍活动而被定罪。这是国际法院（ICJ）就《维也纳领事关系公约》（VCCR）第 36 条的解释发生的第三起争议。与之前的领事权利案件中的申请人相比，印度寻求救济，包括撤销对贾达夫在巴基斯坦的定罪、释放他的拘留以及将他安全转移到印度。在一致认定它具有管辖权后，国际法院的 15 名法官，只有专案法官吉拉尼持反对意见，坚持认为巴基斯坦违反了 VCCR 第 36 条，没有及时通知 Jadhav 根据该条款享有的权利；未能立即通知印度在巴基斯坦的相应领事馆他被拘留；并剥夺印度与贾达夫联系、探视被拘留者和安排他的法律代表的权利。此外，在只有吉拉尼专案法官持反对意见的情况下，法院认定，巴基斯坦有义务不再拖延地告知贾达夫他的权利，并有义务让印度领事官员接触他。法院进一步认定，适当的赔偿要求巴基斯坦通过自己的选择，对 Jadhav 进行有效的审查和重新考虑。的定罪和量刑，以确保充分重视侵犯其权利的后果。最后，国际法院再次在 Jillani 专案法官的反对下宣布，继续中止执行是有效审查和重新考虑对 Jadhav 的定罪和判刑的必要条件。