scholarly journals Abuse of Diplomatic Privileges and the Balance between Immunities and the Duty to Respect the Local Laws and Regulations under the Vienna Conventions: The Recent Indian Experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 182-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. R. Subramanian
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Special Reference ◽  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Diplomatic Protection ◽  
Indian Experience ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Abstract The successful adoption of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is hailed as the ‘landmark of the highest significance in the codification of international law’. It represented the first significant codification of any international instrument since the United Nations was established. However, despite the codification of the above rules, which is largely based on the pre-existing customary international law, the scope of diplomatic protection was not free from issues and controversies. In recent times, unfortunately, there is a growing tendency amongst the diplomats to abuse their diplomatic status to commit acts prohibited by law and still claim immunity from legal process. The States-parties also aggravate this situation by selectively interpreting the rules in their favor, ignoring the fact that reciprocity is the basis for the successful functioning of the diplomatic protection. In this connection, this paper addresses the problem of abuse of immunities and privileges and its adverse implications on the balance between immunities and the duty to respect the local laws and regulations, especially with special reference to the recent Indian experience. It explores the two recent Indian diplomatic confrontations, namely, the arrest of Devyani Khobragade and the travel ban on Daniele Mancini. Based on the study, it highlights the need for a well-balanced and equitable enforcement of the Vienna Conventions in the interest of maintenance of cordial diplomatic relations in the international community.

scholarly journals The Obligation of Diplomats to Respect the Laws and Regulations of the Hosting State: A Critical Overview of the International Practices

Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 18
Author(s):  
Nehaluddin Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Diplomatic Protection ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Critical Overview ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Under Article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a receiving state may “at any time and without having to explain its decision” declare any member of a diplomatic staff persona non grata. A person so declared is considered unacceptable and is usually recalled to his or her home nation. If not recalled, the receiving state “may refuse to recognize the person concerned as a member of the mission.” However, despite the codification of the above rules, which is largely based on pre-existing customary international law, the opportunity for diplomatic protection is not free of issues and controversies. In recent times, unfortunately, there has been a growing tendency amongst diplomats to abuse their diplomatic status, in order to commit acts prohibited by law and claim immunity from the legal process. This paper addresses the problem of abuse of immunities and privileges and its adverse implications on the balance between immunities and the duty to respect the local laws and regulations. We analyze several past cases of declaration of persona non grata involving various countries.

Declarations, Statements and ‘Disguised Reservations’ with Respect to the Convention on the Law of the Sea

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 767-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. D. M. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The question of reservations was one of the ‘controversial issues’ facing the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in drawing up the final clauses of the Convention. On the one hand it was argued that the integrity of the Convention must be safeguarded and that the ‘package deal’ must be protected from possible disintegration by the making of reservations. On the other hand the view was held that ‘allowance for the possibility of reservations is aimed at accommodating the views of the delegations who have maintained that they cannot become parties to the Convention unless the Convention permits them to exercise a right to enter reservations, in accordance with customary international law and as envisaged under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.’ In short the need to preserve the integrity of the Convention was pitted against the need to secure universal participation in the Convention.

Art.48 Denunciation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bantekas Ilias
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines Article 48 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). A state may express its consent to no longer be bound by a treaty to which it is a party by way of denunciation, withdrawal, or suspension of the treaty in question. Article 48 CRPD does not expressly allow states to withdraw from or suspend the operation of the Convention. Although it only provides for denunciation through a written notification the effect of which commences a year after it is received by the depositary, Article 48 CRPD is silent as to whether a state may denounce the entire Convention or also parts of it. This matter is dealt with under the general provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which reflect customary international law.

Art.41 The Secretary-General of the United Nations Shall Be the Depositary of the Present Convention

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bantekas Ilias
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
The Body ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines Article 41 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). In accordance with article 76(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the designation of the depositary of a treaty may be made by the negotiating states, either in the treaty itself or in some other manner. Practice, as is the case with Article 41 CRPD, suggests that depositories are designated in the body of the treaty. The depositary is expected to undertake certain functions and assume several powers under customary international law, none of which are explained in the depositary provisions of multilateral treaties. The functions and powers of the depositary should be distinguished from other functions and powers entrusted to the same entity under other provisions of the same treaty.

The Practice and Case Law of Israel in Matters Related to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 668-700 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Norms ◽  
The Other ◽  
District Court ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Foreign Countries

Two decisions were rendered recently by Israeli courts of lower instances which concern the field of diplomatic immunities. The first, delivered by the Magistrate Court in Petah Tikwa, deals with the inviolability of diplomatic premises and with the waiver thereof; and the second, by the District Court in Jerusalem, refers to the question of state immunity from attachment and execution, and seems to constitute a clear diversion from the accepted international norms and rules on this issue. Both decisions, rendered in the matter of the residence of the Ambassador of Côte d'Ivoire to Israel, will be examined separately, following the factual background relevant to each.The question of the inviolability of diplomatic premises, as well as that of a diplomat's immunity from jurisdiction, is a separate issue from that of state immunity. The first considers the treatment given to diplomats in foreign countries, and is codified in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (the “Convention”), while the latter consists only of customary international law, and deals with the concepts of acts of state and the immunity of sovereign states from jurisdiction by the courts of another state. In the following survey we will show that in some instances, the two issues have been confused and conclusions drawn from one to the other without consideration of the differences between the two.

Exemption of Mission Premises from Taxation

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
General Practice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
Local Taxes ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

This chapter examines Article 23 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which deals with the exemption of the diplomatic mission premises from taxation. Article 23 states that the sending State and the head of the mission shall be exempt from all dues and taxes in respect of the premises of the mission. This exemption however shall not apply to dues and taxes payable under the law of the receiving State by persons contracting with the sending State or the head of the mission. This practice traces its roots from the nineteenth century when it was not based on diplomatic immunity but on courtesy. Many States concluded bilateral agreements or arrangements providing exemption—a practice which would have been unnecessary if customary international law had required it. During the twentieth century, general practice based on courtesy or on reciprocity began to harden into a customary rule requiring exemption from central and local taxes on mission property.

Preamble

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Character Theory ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter describes the Preamble of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations set forth by the International Law Commission, the main legal body which promotes the progressive development of international law and oversees its codification. It briefly describes three theories that form as the basis of the statements written at the Preamble —the ‘exterritoriality’ theory, the ‘representative character’ theory, and the ‘functional necessity’ theory. All of these theories heavily influence matters regarding diplomatic privileges and immunities. Ultimately, the Preamble to the Convention has two important legal functions—to state the view of the participating States on the theoretical basis of diplomatic privileges and immunities, and to make explicit the relationship between the Convention and customary international law.

Transparency International France v. Mr X

2021 ◽  
Vol 195 ◽  
pp. 219-226
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Vice President ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Transparency International ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Head Of State

219State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Immunity of individual officials — Head of State immunity — Immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae — Immunity ratione personae confined to Head of State and certain high-ranking officials — Immunity ratione materiae applicable only in respect of official acts — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Vice-President of State accused of misappropriation of funds and money laundering by authorities of another State — Whether entitled to immunity — Immunity of diplomatic agents — State sovereignty — Customary international law — The law of France

scholarly journals THE PRESCRIPTIVE AND ENFORCEMENT JURISDICTION OF A COASTAL STATE IN RELATION TO SHIP SOURCE POLLUTION OCCURS IN ITS VARIOUS MARITIME ZONES, UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA AND THE CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 616-624
Author(s):  
Zacharias L. Kapsis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The coastal state jurisdiction is the jurisdiction enjoyed by a coastal state in relation to breaches of regulations and laws by foreign flagged ships that take place within its various jurisdictional zones. The prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction comprise the main power of a coastal state. Prescriptive is the jurisdiction to prescribe laws and regulations, while enforcement is the jurisdiction to enforce such laws. The rights and obligations of a state in relation to navigation and pollution are determined primarily by international conventions and customary international law. The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) is the most widely ratified convention in this field of law, outlining the rights and obligations of the states in relation to their variousmaritmezones as well as with respect to environmental protection.States have under UNCLOS the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment and they are also under an obligation to take measures jointly or individually to reduce and prevent, control and reduce pollution of the marine environment from any source including the atmosphere and from vessels.In relation to ship source pollution there are various obligations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document