New Delhi, May 18 (PTI) : Rejecting Pakistan’s contention “firmly”, ministry of external affairs (MEA) spokesperson Vikas Swarup said the Geospatial Information Regulation Bill is an “entirely internal legislative matter” of India.
“The government firmly rejects Pakistan's repeated and increasing attempts to impose on the international community matters that India has always been open to address bilaterally with Pakistan,” Swarup said.
Minister of state for home, Kiren Rijiju, too responded, stating that it's the duty of the government to ensure that India's map is depicted properly. “We don't take cognisance to Pakistan's objection to the draft bill. We will take suggestions and views of citizens, experts and various stakeholders before its finalisation,” he told PTI.
The draft legislation forbids wrong depiction, dissemination, publication and acquisition of India’s geospatial information, whether inside India or outside, and penalising them with a fine ranging from Rs.10 lakh to Rs.100 crore and imprisonment of up to seven years.
The action has been envisaged by the government against the backdrop of instances where certain social networking sites showed Jammu and Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh as part of Pakistan and China respectively.
Pakistan’s objection to India’s legislation stems from the long-standing dispute on territorial claims in Kashmir between the two countries. Even though the Line of Control (LoC), which stretches to 740 kilometres, became the defacto border after Pakistan supported Qabayali invasion on J&K in 1948, India claims the whole of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), including Gillgit-Baltistan as part of its territory.
Pakistan's foreign office in Islamabad earlier said that through letters by its permanent representative in New York, it has shared concern to the United Nations secretary general and the president of the UN Security Council.
It said that the official map of India has been depicting the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir as part of India, which is factually incorrect and legally untenable and “in violation of UNSC resolutions”.