Montuya v. Chedid and Another

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 714-721
Keyword(s):  
Policy Decision ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Related Case ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant employed at residence of diplomatic agent — Certification of diplomatic status — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Whether outside diplomat’s official function — Immunity limited to acts performed in exercise of official functions — Whether Court lacking jurisdictionTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Commercial activity exception — Scope — Whether Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and related case law relevant in determining scope of exceptionRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Diplomatic Relations Act — Whether Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and related case law relevant in interpreting Vienna Convention — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction over complaintsComity — Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic immunity enhancing relations among nations — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Gonzalez Paredes v. Vila and Nielsen

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 678-688
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Professional Activity ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
Ordinary Meaning ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant against former employers — Certification of diplomatic status of former employers — Exceptions to immunity — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Weight to be given to Statement of Interest filed by United States — Whether pursuit of academic studies a professional activity under Vienna Convention — Whether fraud recognized as an exception in Vienna Convention — Whether Court lacking jurisdiction — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Intent of signatories — Ordinary meaning of terms in light of object and purpose — Liberal construction — Recourse to history, negotiations and practical construction adopted by parties if meaning unclear — Whether exceptions in Vienna Convention applicable — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityComity — Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic immunity enhancing relations among nations — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Fun v. Pulgar and Albergrin

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 722-727
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
The Law ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant alleging that she had been trafficked and forced to work by former employers — Certification of diplomatic status of former employers — Whether diplomatic immunity continuing despite subsequent termination of diplomatic status — Whether commercial activity exception applicable to hiring of domestic servant — Whether subsequent attempts at service defective — Whether Court lacking jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Sabbithi and Others v. Al Saleh and Another

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 703-713
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Trafficking Victims Protection Act ◽  
Domestic Servants ◽  
Trafficking Victims ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
Jus Cogens

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servants against former employers — Certification of diplomatic status of former employers — Exceptions to immunity — Whether employment of domestic servants a commercial activity — Weight to be given to Statement of Interest filed by United States — Whether plaintiffs’ constitutional slavery claim giving way to diplomatic immunity — Whether defendants’ conduct constituting human trafficking — Whether jus cogens exception to diplomatic immunity — Whether Vienna Convention being overridden by statute — Diplomatic agent leaving post — Residual immunity under Article 39 — Immunity limited to acts performed in exercise of official functions — Whether Court lacking jurisdiction — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityHuman rights — Prohibition of slavery in United States Constitution — Whether conduct constituting trafficking in human beings — Whether constitutional claim giving way to diplomatic immunity — Whether jus cogens exception to diplomatic immunity — Whether Trafficking Victims Protection Act 2000 overriding Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — United States Constitution — Whether constitutional claim giving way to diplomatic immunity — Whether jus cogens exception to diplomatic immunity — Whether Trafficking Victims Protection Act 2000 overriding Vienna Convention — Whether Court having jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Reyes v. Al-Malki and Another

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 535-574
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
The Law ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Palermo Protocol

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Object and purpose — Action by domestic servant employed at residence of diplomatic agent — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Article 31(1) — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Relationship between Articles 31(1)(c) and 42 — Domestic servant a victim of trafficking — Diplomatic agent leaving position before hearing — Residual immunity under Article 39 — Immunity limited to acts performed in the exercise of official functionsHuman rights — Prohibition of slavery — Trafficking in human beings — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 4 — United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, 2000 (“the Palermo Protocol”) — Whether a norm of jus cogens — Whether overriding diplomatic immunity — Whether provisions of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 to be read in light of the Palermo ProtocolTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Articles 31 to 33 — Application to Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Text — Object and purpose — Travaux préparatoires — The law of the United Kingdom

PENYALAHGUNAAN HAK KEKEBALAN DIPLOMATIK DITINJAU DARI KONVENSI WINA 1961 (STUDI KASUS PENYELUNDUPAN EMAS OLEH PEJABAT DIPLOMATIK KOREA UTARA DI BANGLADESH)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Komang Sukaniasa
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Special Power ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right ◽  
State Representatives

Diplomatic officials are state representatives in developing diplomatic relations with other countries where it is accredited. Diplomatic officials have the rights of immunity and privileges granted by the sending country. Besides enjoying these rights, diplomatic officials also have obligations. As a diplomatic official from North Korea, Son Young Nam is obliged to obey the rules contained in the 1961 Vienna Convention, the 1969 New York Convention, and to respect the national law of the country of Bangladesh which is the country where he was accredited. Son Young Nam's smuggling of gold into Bangladesh was a form of abuse of diplomatic immunity. The act violated Articles 27 and 41 (1) of the 1961 Vienna Convention and Article 25b of The Special Power Act of Bangladesh. Although they have the right to immunity, these rights are not absolute. Immune rights can be breached in the event of gross violations committed by diplomatic officials.

PENERAPAN PRINSIP PERSONA NON GRATA TERHADAP DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENGANIAYAAN TKI OLEH DUTA BESAR ARAB SAUDI DI JERMAN)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.

Introductory Remarks by Scott Anderson

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 141-158
Author(s):  
Scott Anderson
Keyword(s):  
International Institutions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Nuclear Forces ◽  
The Past ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
International Commitments ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Trump Administration

Over the past two years, we have really seen the Trump administration make treaty withdrawal something of a signature move, from the Treaty of Amity with Iran to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, to the Optional Protocol for the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The administration has taken steps to remove the United States, rightly or wrongly, from a wide array of longstanding international legal obligations. And while it is far from unprecedented, the administration has done so at a little bit of a faster pace than certain prior administrations have—and has embedded a lot of these moves within a consistent critique of international institutions and international commitments that promises further change on the horizon.

Settlement of Disputes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
International Court ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

This chapter considers the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes as discussed in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. As a general rule, disputes over the interpretation or application of the Convention must be resolved speedily by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other authorities of the receiving State in determining whether criminal proceedings may be brought, by national courts when diplomatic immunity is pleaded, or by governments in deciding on whether a member of mission should be recalled or more generally on the level at which they wish to maintain diplomatic relations. According to the protocol, disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention shall lie within the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and may accordingly be brought before the Court by an application made by any party to the dispute being a Party to the present Protocol.

Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities: A New Regime is Soon to be Adopted by The United States

1968 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo J. Harris
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
The Future

As soon as the House of Representatives considers and passes the Diplomatic Relations Act of 1967, and the President signs the new Act into law, the United States will proceed to deposit its ratification of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. These two documents will make rather extensive changes in United States law and practice with respect to diplomatic privileges and immunities. It will be the purpose of this article to give a capsule summary of the manner in which the Diplomatic Relations Act may be anticipated to operate in the future, and to indicate the pertinent areas in which the previous United States law and practice will be affected thereby.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document