Pondage, power and Pakistan—India versus ‘Indus’ court at The Hague

On May 15, 2026, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued a supplemental award on "maximum pondage" — the amount of water that can be held in reservoi...

What Happened

On May 15, 2026, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued a supplemental award on "maximum pondage" — the amount of water that can be held in reservoirs — concerning India's Kishenganga (330 MW) and Ratle (850 MW) hydroelectric projects in Jammu & Kashmir.
The award affirmed Pakistan's position that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) places substantive limits on India's water-control capability on the Western Rivers, specifically the Jhelum and Chenab.
India categorically rejected the award, calling the PCA tribunal "illegally constituted" and reiterating that the IWT has been placed "in abeyance" since April 2025.
The PCA Court of Arbitration ruled that India's unilateral invocation of abeyance does not limit the tribunal's competence, and that the IWT provides no mechanism for unilateral suspension.
The most likely near-term outcome is a legal stalemate: the tribunal continues issuing awards, India continues to reject them, and enforcement remains absent without any international compliance mechanism.

Static Topic Bridges

Indus Waters Treaty, 1960

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on 19 September 1960 in Karachi, after nine years of World Bank-brokered negotiations, by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan. It is considered one of the most durable water-sharing treaties in the world, having survived multiple wars and decades of bilateral hostility.

Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) allocated to India for unrestricted use.
Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) allocated to Pakistan, with India permitted limited non-consumptive, domestic, and run-of-river hydroelectric uses.
Establishes the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) for bilateral cooperation and dispute resolution.
Dispute resolution hierarchy: bilateral talks → Neutral Expert (for technical disputes) → Court of Arbitration (for legal disputes).
The World Bank is a signatory in its role as facilitator but is not an arbitrator.

Connection to this news: Both Kishenganga (on the Jhelum tributary) and Ratle (on the Chenab) are on Western Rivers, meaning their designs must conform to IWT's technical specifications — the precise dimensions of permissible pondage are now the subject of the PCA's supplemental award.

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) and India's Jurisdictional Objection

The PCA, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, is an intergovernmental organisation providing dispute resolution services. Under the IWT's Article IX, disputes that cannot be resolved through a Neutral Expert may be referred to a Court of Arbitration. India contests whether the PCA, as constituted by Pakistan's unilateral request, is the proper forum — arguing instead that the IWT mandates a Neutral Expert for the technical design issues at stake.

India has not participated in PCA proceedings, maintaining that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction.
The PCA upheld its own jurisdiction in September 2023, proceeding in India's absence.
The "pondage" question is a technical specification dispute: it concerns how much water can be stored at the project intake structure during daily regulation cycles.
India's MEA has described the PCA as a "so-called Court of Arbitration" and stated it will not be bound by its awards.

Connection to this news: The May 2026 award is a supplemental ruling on the specific pondage parameters, building on earlier jurisdictional and merits awards that India has also rejected. The legal impasse reflects a structural gap in the IWT's enforcement architecture.

Indus Waters Treaty in Abeyance: India's Post-Pahalgam Position

Following a terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, on 22 April 2025, India announced that the IWT would be held "in abeyance." This is a contested legal status: the PCA has ruled that the IWT contains no provision for unilateral suspension and can only be terminated by mutual consent.

The IWT has no formal suspension mechanism — either it is in force or it has been terminated by mutual agreement.
India's continued construction activity on Kishenganga and Ratle signals a de facto continuation of treaty-permitted work, even as it formally denies the treaty framework.
Pakistan has used the IWT's dispute mechanism to seek enforceable limits on Indian project designs.
The legal record created by PCA proceedings may have future relevance in multilateral forums, even without immediate enforcement.

Connection to this news: The tension between India's abeyance stance and the PCA's continuing proceedings is the central dynamic in this dispute — one side asserting the treaty is suspended, the other asserting it remains fully operational.

Key Facts & Data

Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project: 330 MW capacity, on the Kishanganga River (Jhelum tributary), Bandipora district, J&K; features a 37-metre diversion dam and 23.25-km headrace tunnel; annual generation approximately 1,713 million units.
Ratle Hydroelectric Project: 850 MW capacity, on the Chenab River, Kishtwar district, J&K; 133-metre gravity dam; approximately 21% complete as of May 2025, revised completion target 2028.
The IWT was signed in 1960 after nine years of negotiations; the World Bank is a signatory.
The third India-Nordic summit and broader India-Pakistan IWT dispute are separate issues — the Pahalgam attack in April 2025 precipitated the abeyance declaration.
PCA's September 2023 jurisdiction award and the May 2026 supplemental pondage award are the two most recent formal milestones in the arbitration proceedings.