ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Sunday welcomed the Supplemental Award issued by the Court of Arbitration in the Indus Waters Treaty proceedings, saying the ruling had firmly upheld Islamabad’s long-standing position that India’s water-control capability on the Western Rivers remained subject to strict Treaty limitations.
In an official statement issued after the Award dated May 15, 2026, the Government of Pakistan said the Court had affirmed that the Indus Waters Treaty imposed “substantive limits on India’s water-control capability on the Western Rivers,” adding that such restrictions “are not formalities.”
The government stated that the ruling established that pondage for a Run-of-River hydropower project “must be justified by real project needs, actual expected operation, site hydrology, hydraulic conditions, power-system requirements, and the information and explanation required under the Treaty.”
The Supplemental Award concerns the long-running design disputes relating to India’s Ratle Hydroelectric Plant and Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty.
The ruling comes amid heightened tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours following the 2025 Pahalgam incident, after which India announced suspension of water cooperation measures relating to Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty framework.
Islamabad has consistently maintained that the Treaty is an internationally binding agreement that cannot be unilaterally suspended or held in abeyance by either party.
Pakistan said the Court’s latest findings built upon the General Issues Award issued on August 8, 2025, and provided practical effect to the principle that “installed capacity and anticipated load must be realistic, well-founded and defensible.”
According to the statement, the Court held that installed capacity “must correspond to actual expected operation, hydrologic and hydraulic data, and Treaty requirements,” while anticipated load “must correspond to actual expected operation and to the projected needs of the power system the plant is intended to serve.”
It described the findings as addressing “a core Treaty concern,” asserting that India could not justify expanded pondage through “imagined capacity, artificial load curves, unrealistic peaking assumptions, or bare assertions of compliance with Paragraph 15 release limits.”
“Paragraph 15 remains an operational constraint, but it is not a substitute for an evidence-based justification of the water-control capacity sought,” the statement said.
The government further stated that the Award strengthened Pakistan’s review rights under the Treaty by placing responsibility on India to provide sufficient technical data and explanation to establish compliance.
“If India fails to do so, it fails to carry its burden of establishing that the proposed maximum Pondage satisfies Paragraph 8(c) of Annexure D,” the statement added.
Pakistan also noted that the Court confirmed any applicable minimum-flow obligation must be considered while calculating pondage required for Firm Power generation, where such obligations exist and are not otherwise fulfilled.
The government emphasized that the Court had earlier ruled that awards issued by the Court of Arbitration were “final and binding on the Parties” and carried “controlling legal effect for subsequent Treaty bodies on relevant questions of Treaty interpretation.”
Pakistan said it would place these interpretations before the Neutral Expert process “consistent with Treaty procedures and applicable confidentiality arrangements.”
Reaffirming commitment to the Indus Waters Treaty and peaceful dispute resolution, Pakistan said it would continue pursuing “every lawful and diplomatic means” to ensure hydroelectric projects on the Western Rivers were designed and operated “strictly within Treaty limits.”
Calling the ruling a “strategic consolidation” of Pakistan’s Treaty position, the statement said the Award established that “maximum Pondage must be realistic, evidence-based, hydrologically grounded, power-system justified, Treaty-compliant, and incapable of inflation through artificial assumptions.”
.jpg)
