In February 2013, the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled in favour of Indias position on the diversion ,of Kishanganga water setting aside the objections raised by

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 113 (CAPF/2013)
In February 2013, the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled in favour of India’s position on the diversion ,of Kishanganga water setting aside the objections raised by

question_subject: 

Geography

question_exam: 

CAPF

stats: 

0,69,42,69,9,19,14

keywords: 

{'international court': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'kishanganga water': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'arbitration': [0, 0, 1, 2], 'hague': [1, 0, 0, 0], 'diversion': [0, 0, 0, 3], 'bangladesh': [4, 0, 4, 2], 'nepal': [2, 0, 0, 2], 'india': [8, 1, 7, 13], 'objections': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'pakistan': [3, 0, 1, 2], 'china': [1, 0, 1, 2]}

The correct answer is option 1: Pakistan. In February 2013, the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled in favor of India`s position on the diversion of Kishanganga water, setting aside the objections raised by Pakistan.

This means that the court agreed with India`s stance on the matter and dismissed Pakistan`s objections. The Kishanganga river is located in the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan. India had constructed a hydropower project on the river called the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant, which involved diverting water from the river. Pakistan had raised objections to this diversion, claiming that it violated the Indus Waters Treaty.

The ruling of the International Court of Arbitration favored India, indicating that the diversion of Kishanganga water was justified from a legal standpoint. It is important to note that this ruling specifically applies to the Kishanganga river dispute between India and Pakistan and does not involve any other countries mentioned in the options (China, Nepal, and Bangladesh).

Practice this on app