The Permanent Court of Arbitration has reaffirmed the validity of the Indus Water Treaty, ruling that India cannot unilaterally suspend or place the treaty in abeyance.
In its latest decision, the Hague-based tribunal upheld an earlier award stating that the treaty remains legally binding on both Pakistan and India, rejecting arguments that either side could suspend the agreement without mutual consent.
The ruling relates to longstanding disputes over Indian hydroelectric projects on the western rivers of the Indus basin. Pakistan has repeatedly argued that India’s run-of-river projects could reduce downstream water flows and negatively affect agriculture in Pakistan.
The tribunal also reaffirmed its previous award issued in August 2025, which directed India to allow the waters of the western rivers to flow for Pakistan’s “unrestricted use” under the Indus water treaty framework.
The court further stated that any exceptions related to hydroelectric power generation must strictly comply with the treaty’s provisions rather than what India considers “best practices” or ideal technical standards.
India rejected the ruling, with External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal calling the proceedings of the arbitration court “null and void.” He said New Delhi’s position on keeping the treaty in abeyance remained unchanged.
The PCA had originally issued its binding interpretation award in August 2025 in a case filed by Pakistan in 2016. Under the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanism, decisions by the Court of Arbitration and Neutral Experts are considered final and binding on both parties.
Political and diplomatic analysts strongly criticised India’s rejection of the ruling, describing it as a violation of international law and treaty obligations.
Former Pakistani ambassador Manzoorul Haq said India’s refusal to recognise the court’s authority reflected disregard for international legal institutions and undermined the rule of law as well as the World Bank-backed treaty framework.
He warned that continued violations of the treaty could threaten regional peace and stability, adding that any conflict over water resources between two nuclear-armed neighbours could have consequences beyond South Asia.