The Hindu Editorial Analysis
23 May 2025
Use international law to take on Pakistan-backed terror
(Source – The Hindu, National Edition – Page No. – 08)
Topic: GS 2: International Relations | Role of International Law | India’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy | ICJ Jurisdiction and Treaties
Context
- Following Operation Sindoor after the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2024, India has demonstrated kinetic responses to cross-border terrorism.
- The editorial argues that beyond military measures, India must embrace a lawfare strategy—using international treaties, conventions, and the ICJ—to hold Pakistan accountable for sponsoring terrorism.
Introduction
Terrorism crosses borders; so must justice.
India’s military response to terror must be complemented with a diplomatic-legal offensive to expose, isolate, and pressure state sponsors of terrorism.
The time is ripe for India to invoke international law, terrorism conventions, and UN mechanisms to fight terror with evidence, treaties, and global legitimacy.
The Strategy of Lawfare: What It Means
1. From Hot Pursuit to Legal Pressure
- While strikes like Operation Sindoor serve tactical purposes, they must be backed by strategic documentation and legal action.
- India’s case against Pakistan should be grounded in treaty violations, UNSC resolutions, and global conventions.
2. Benefits of Lawfare
- Shifts the narrative from “India vs Pakistan” to “rule of law vs rogue state”, enhancing global support.
- Demonstrates India’s commitment to international norms, strengthening its diplomatic credibility.
Applicable International Conventions
1. Terror Financing and Bombing Conventions
- ICSFT (International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism)
- Terrorist Bombing Convention
- Both treaties obligate States to prevent, suppress, and punish financing and support of terrorism.
2. SAARC Regional Convention & Additional Protocols
- These mandate action against those planning, abetting, or supporting acts of terror, even if not committed on their soil.
3. Article 6 of SAARC Protocol
- Requires States to eradicate and punish terror support systems, which Pakistan violates by harboring groups like LeT and JeM.
Taking the Case to the ICJ
1. Jurisdiction Provisions in Treaties
- Both ICSFT and the Terrorist Bombing Convention empower India to take legal disputes to the ICJ.
- Articles 20(1) and 24(1) allow for dispute resolution through the Court.
2. Pakistan’s Reservations
- Pakistan has filed a reservation against ICJ jurisdiction under ICSFT, but not under the Bombing Convention.
- India can still take action using this legal channel, similar to how Ukraine brought Russia to the ICJ.
3. Precedent: Kulbhushan Jadhav Case
- India has successfully invoked the ICJ against Pakistan previously.
- Clear, indisputable evidence, not diplomatic rhetoric, is key to building a credible legal case.
India’s Legal To-Do List
- Gather and publish evidence of Pakistan’s direct or indirect support to groups involved in attacks like Pahalgam.
- Launch multi-party international outreach to explain legal violations.
- Use UNSC mechanisms, FATF records, and terrorism databases to establish a pattern of state complicity.
- Coordinate with nations like the U.S., UK, EU, and ICJ allies to garner support.
Conclusion
India’s war on terrorism must not end with the missile—it must reach the courtroom.
Lawfare is India’s next strategic frontier, offering global support, moral legitimacy, and long-term impact.
By pursuing Pakistan through international law, India can transform tactical victories into strategic gains, and redefine the global narrative around cross-border terrorism.