Critical Ruling: Indus Waters Treaty Dispute Takes a Decisive Turn as Hague Tribunal Demands Dam Records

The long-running Indus Waters Treaty dispute between Pakistan and India has entered a critical phase after the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague directed India to submit detailed operational records of its hydropower projects constructed on rivers allocated to Pakistan.

The ruling represents a significant procedural development in arbitration proceedings under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), which governs the sharing of the Indus Basin’s waters between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.

Tribunal Orders India to Share Dam Records

In its order, the Hague tribunal instructed India to provide operational logbooks of the Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects by February 9. The tribunal further stated that failure to comply would require New Delhi to formally justify its non-cooperation before the court.

At the same time, Pakistan was asked to clarify by February 2 the specific documents it seeks from India, ensuring procedural transparency in the Indus Waters Treaty dispute.

According to the tribunal, hearings on the merits of the case will proceed regardless of India’s participation, reinforcing the authority of international arbitration mechanisms.

Why Operational Data Matters in the Indus Waters Treaty Dispute

Operational data from upstream dams is central to Pakistan’s case in the Indus Waters Treaty dispute. Islamabad has consistently argued that India is:

• Illegally storing water
• Manipulating river flows
• Undermining downstream water availability

Pakistan maintains that dam logbooks will help establish whether India has violated treaty provisions by exceeding permitted water storage levels or altering flows during critical agricultural seasons.

According to
Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), factual operational evidence is essential in resolving disputes involving shared natural resources.

Baglihar and Kishanganga Projects Under Scrutiny

The Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects, located in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, have long been contentious under the Indus Waters Treaty dispute framework.

Key concerns raised by Pakistan include:

• Design features enabling artificial water level manipulation
• Potential storage beyond treaty limits
• Impact on downstream flows into Pakistan

The tribunal explicitly noted that only the court — not neutral experts — holds authority to approve additional water storage under the treaty.

Pakistan’s Legal Strategy and Arbitration Proceedings

Pakistan will be represented at the upcoming hearings by a high-level delegation led by the Attorney General, signaling the importance Islamabad attaches to the case.

Officials argue that the tribunal’s directive strengthens Pakistan’s legal position and affirms the legitimacy of arbitration under the Indus Waters Treaty dispute process.

You can read our earlier internal analysis here:
Indus Waters Treaty Arbitration Explained

Tribunal Authority and Limits on Water Storage

A key clarification from the Hague tribunal relates to treaty interpretation. The court emphasized that:

• Neutral Experts cannot authorize interim storage measures
• Any design enabling water levels to rise above Full Pondage Level would violate the treaty
• Jurisdiction covers all components of run-of-river hydroelectric projects

This interpretation narrows the scope for unilateral action and reinforces treaty safeguards.

According to
International Water Law Project, such rulings strengthen enforceability of transboundary water agreements.

Neutral Expert Process and Parallel Proceedings

While arbitration continues in The Hague, parallel Neutral Expert proceedings — initiated at India’s request — are set to advance to their next phase in Vienna.

Pakistan’s Foreign Office confirmed that it will participate fully in both tracks of the Indus Waters Treaty dispute, despite India’s decision to halt involvement in arbitration.

The Neutral Expert has already ruled that India’s absence will not prevent proceedings, underscoring continuity in the dispute-resolution process.

Foreign Office Position on Treaty Compliance

In an official statement, Pakistan’s Foreign Office reaffirmed its commitment to engaging in treaty mechanisms in good faith. It welcomed the tribunal’s clarification that jurisdiction applies comprehensively to all hydropower components on the western rivers.

The FO reiterated that treaty obligations remain binding and cannot be selectively interpreted or suspended — a stance echoed by international legal experts.

According to
United Nations Treaty Collection, compliance and good faith implementation are core principles of treaty law.

Regional and Legal Implications of the Ruling

The latest development in the Indus Waters Treaty dispute carries broader implications:

• Reinforces international arbitration authority
• Sets precedent for transboundary water governance
• Highlights the limits of unilateral infrastructure actions
• Elevates water disputes as regional security concerns

With climate change intensifying water stress across South Asia, adherence to established treaties is increasingly viewed as a matter of peace and stability.

Conclusion

The Hague tribunal’s order marks a decisive procedural gain for Pakistan in the Indus Waters Treaty dispute, strengthening the role of legal accountability in resolving one of South Asia’s most sensitive transboundary water conflicts.

As arbitration proceeds, the case will continue to test the resilience of international water law — and the willingness of states to uphold binding agreements amid geopolitical tensions.