'Not prepared enough': THIS is how Pakistan's media covered ICJ's ruling on Kulbhushan Jadhav

Pakistan's media blamed poor preparation for its defeat in Kulbhushan Jadhav case at ICJ

While the Internationa Court of Justice’s stay order on execution of Kulbhshan Jadhav was hailed as a big diplomatic win for India, Pakistan maintained that it will have no impact on trial against former Indian Navy officer. However, media outlets in Pakistan are describing the ICJ order as a ‘setback’ and even blamed poor preparation for its defeat at world Court.

We have compiled the reaction of Pak media on ICJ’s verdict

Geo News: Not Prepared enough

Geo News stressed that the fact that Pakistan was not well prepared enough to face the proceedings resulted in verdict going India’s way. tA host of experts and analysts told the channel that Islamabad shouldn’t have conceded the compulsory jurisdiction of ICJ and instead should have gone with its own judgment.

Express Tribune: Great embarrassment if Pak does not comply with ICJ decision

The Express Tribune quoted legal experts saying Pakistan may face Great embarrassment if it fails to comply with ICJ order. The daily also reported that the experts blamed the Foreign Office for its poor handling of the case.

Dawn: Setback for Pakistan

Pakistan’s Dawn described the ICJ ruling as setback for the country. However, it maintained that Pak officials are still confident of their chances. The daily also reported that Pakistan would hire an ad-hoc judge in this special case which is as per the ICJ rules.

Pakistan Today: ICJ verdict will have no impact

Following ICJ order, Pak Defence Minister Khawaja Asif gave an interview to Pakistan Today saying that the issue is of Pakistan’s national security and there will be no compromise on it. Asserting that ICJ had a formal stay in the matter, Asif said that Jadhav who is a ‘RAW agent’ will be convicted after fulfilling all necessary legal procedures.

The Nation: ICJ intervention has no substance

The Nation argued that the ICJ’s have no jurisdiction in the case and its intevention was unnecessary as under a 2008 bilateral treaty, the right to consular access can be disregarded in the matters of national security.