The book examines diplomatic immunity and provides a historical analysis of the granting of diplomatic immunity to non-diplomats, based on the perspectives of several states. It features contributions in which experts from four continents and from academia and practice present their views and perspectives.
This paper examines the Jadhav case filed by India before the ICJ. Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian national, was arrested by Pakistan on charges of espionage, sabotage and terrorism. Pakistan denied several requests from India seeking consular access to Jadhav after his arrest preventing it from rendering him necessary assistance. A military court of Pakistan sentenced him to death. Under the circumstances, India filed a case before the ICJ seeking its jurisdiction under Article 36(1) of its Statute to assert its right of consular access. Pakistan contested the jurisdiction of the ICJ. The ICJ stayed the death sentence and called for memorials to be filed by the Parties to decide first on issues of jurisdiction and later concerning merits as appropriate. This case also offers an opportunity to take an overview of India’s policy and practice concerning peaceful settlement of disputes through judicial means.
Diplomatic interference carries considerable potential for disruption. In the past, diplomats have been accused of attempting to overthrow governments, of using bribes and threats and – as in the 2012 case involving wikileaks founder Julian Assange – granting asylum to persons wanted by judicial authorities. Reactions to these kinds of behaviour can be harsh: expulsions are common and, occasionally, diplomatic relations are severed altogether.
What is the international law on interference? Interference affects one of its cornerstones – the sovereignty of the receiving state – but that is not the only value which the law recognises. Diplomats can often point to the pursuit of legitimate functions or to the protection of human rights, and these aspects too, are appreciated by the international community.
Diplomatic Interference and the Law investigates the main areas in which charges of meddling have arisen, including diplomatic contacts with opposition parties, propaganda activities, the granting of asylum and the use of threats and insults. It analyses situations in which sovereignty meets with competing interests and suggests solutions which avoid a conflict of norms. It also offers advice to foreign offices, diplomats and scholars who encounter this phenomenon on a regular basis and highlights the most efficient ways of dealing with situations of this kind.
Das Spannungsverhältnis zwischen staatlicher Souveränität und dem Schutz des Menschen ist ein ungelöster Brennpunkt des Völkerrechts. Es manifestiert sich u.a. bei der Ausbeutung von Hauspersonal ausländischer Missionen und Diplomaten: Dieses erhält im Gaststaat wegen der Immunität des Entsendelands und seiner Diplomaten keinen oder nur sehr lückenhaft Rechtsschutz. Das bedeutet zugleich, dass das Gastland menschenrechtliche Schutzpflichten nicht erfüllen und das Recht auf Zugang zu einem Gericht nicht sicherstellen kann.
Die Studie analysiert, wie und weshalb IGH, EGMR und UNO-Menschenrechtsausschuss im Verhältnis Staatenimmunität, diplomatische Immunität und Menschenrechte einen Vorrang der Immunitäten anerkennen und so die weitgehende Wirkungslosigkeit der Menschenrechte in Kauf nehmen. Die Autorin zieht den Schluss, dass angesichts der Völkerrechtsentwicklung ein echter Ausgleich zwischen Immunitäten und Menschenrechten erforderlich ist und entwickelt hierfür ein differenziertes Instrumentarium anhand von drei Ausgleichsansätzen: (1) Der Pflicht des Gerichtsstaats, alternative Massnahmen zu treffen, (2) der menschenrechtskonformen Auslegung der Immunitäten und des diplomatischen Rechts sowie (3) dem punktuellen Vorrang der Menschenrechte. Die Studie schlägt zudem vor, welche Ausgleichsmassnahmen (z.B. politische Demarchen, Schlichtungsstelle, Gesetzgebung gegen Ausbeutung) Gerichte vom Gaststaat konkret einfordern sollen, damit dieser die Menschenrechte trotz Respektierung der Immunitäten einhält.
The Enrica Lexie case, concerning the death of two Indian fishermen off the southern Indian coast of Kerala after they were shot by two Italian marines in an alleged anti-piracy action to protect the Italian oil tanker "M.V. Enrica Lexie", has given rise to an interesting question of international diplomatic law: are proceedings for contempt of court permissible against diplomatic agents?
In February 2013, the Italian Ambassador to India submitted an affidavit to the Indian Supreme Court in the proceedings against the marines. A difficult situation arose when a few weeks later the Italian Government expressly announced that it would be acting contrary to the ambassador’s affidavit. The Indian Supreme Court, in response, adopted an order restraining the ambassador from leaving India. Only a last minute decision of the Italian Government to act in line with the ambassador’s sworn statement defused the situation.
The Indian Supreme Court treated the announcement of the Italian Government that it would not act in accordance with the affidavit as a breach of an undertaking given to the Court by the Italian Ambassador giving rise to sanctions for contempt of court.
The paper sets out the facts of the incident by way of a detailed diplomatic case study and examines whether the submission of an affidavit by diplomatic agents precludes them from invoking immunity from jurisdiction in respect of contempt proceedings connected with the affidavit and whether submission of an affidavit amounts to a valid waiver of diplomatic immunity. It shows that diplomatic immunity constitutes an absolute shield against contempt proceedings.
The paper also probes the legality of the Indian Supreme Court’s restraining order and concludes that, while the action of the Italian Government showed wanton disregard for the authority of India’s highest court, this did not give the Indian Supreme Court or the Indian Government any right to prohibit the Italian Ambassador from leaving the country. The only remedy available in case of contempt of court is for the Indian Government to declare the diplomatic agent persona non grata.
Lars Ole Petersen has published Europäisierung der Diplomatie: Völker- und europarechtliche Rahmenbedingungen (Duncker & Humblot 2011). Here's the abstract:Europa befindet sich angesichts des fortschreitenden Aufbaus des Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes in gespannter Erwartung. Der Ausbau der diplomatischen Fähigkeiten der Europäischen Union ist bereits heute spürbar. Mit einem starken Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst wird die Union zunehmend als eigenständiger diplomatischer Akteur in Erscheinung treten.
Ob die Europäische Union die hierfür notwendigen völker- und primärrechtlichen Voraussetzungen erfüllt, blieb dagegen bislang unbeachtet. Lars Ole Petersen geht dieser Frage nach. Die Ergebnisse seiner Untersuchung zeigen, dass die Europäische Union bereits heute die völker- und europarechtlichen Voraussetzungen erfüllt, die ihr eine diplomatische Betätigung auf Augenhöhe mit den Staaten ermöglichen. Sie kann über das Völkergewohnheitsrecht eine nahezu objektive Völkerrechtssubjektivität für sich beanspruchen. Darüber hinaus genießen ihre Diplomaten über das Völkergewohnheitsrecht den vollwertigen Schutz der Wiener Diplomatenrechtskonvention. Die primärrechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen der Verträge legen zudem ein starkes Fundament für den weiteren Ausbau der diplomatischen Kapazitäten der Europäischen Union.
Aufgrund dieser Dynamik müssen die zeitgleichen, verstärkten Integrationsbemühungen zwischen den nationalen diplomatischen Diensten der Mitgliedstaaten kritisch betrachtet werden. Sie stoßen bereits zum heutigen Zeitpunkt an die Grenze der primärrechtlichen Zulässigkeit.
The European Union has a unique ‘sui generis’ status on the international plane, which is reflected in its capability to enter into diplomatic relations with third States and international organizations. Over nearly six decades the EU has gradually built its own worldwide bilateral and multilateral diplomatic network which is made subject, through specific agreements with the host country, to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The ‘Union delegations’ are now operating as the diplomatic missions of the EU as a whole, in contrast to the former Commission delegations. This paper examines the relationship between the EU and international diplomatic law: how does the EU establish and conduct diplomatic relations? What legal instruments are being used? How do the Vienna Convention and customary diplomatic law come into play? What is the exact legal status of EU ambassadors and diplomatic staff? In critically analyzing these issues the specific contribution which the EU makes to the further development of international diplomatic law is assessed.
Article 23 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for the right of EU citizens to diplomatic and consular protection by Member States other than the State of nationality in the territory of a third country. But what are the concepts of diplomatic and consular protection embodied in that Article? Are those typical of public international law or rather novel concepts with autonomous meaning derived from EU law? This paper addresses this question and examines what are possible effects of Article 23 in terms of opposability of the concept of EU citizenship to third states as well as in terms of justiciability of the EU citizen’s right to obtain protection from a non national Member State in a third country. The paper concludes that political and legal practice of the EU and of Member States has yet to provide clear answers to these questions.
Michael Richtsteig has published the second edition of Wiener Übereinkommen über diplomatische und konsularische Beziehungen: Entstehungsgeschichte, Kommentierung, Praxis (Nomos 2010). Here's the abstract:Als erster Kommentar zum Diplomatenrecht (WÜD) und zum Recht der konsularischen Beziehungen (WÜK) knüpft auch die zweite Auflage an die Bedürfnisse der Praxis des Auswärtigen Amtes an. Die komplett überarbeitete Neuauflage berücksichtigt
- alle praxisrelevanten Fragen rund um den auswärtigen Dienst,
- die in diesem Bereich erschienene völkerrechtliche Literatur und
- fügt jeweils neue Abschnitte zur „Praxis anderer Staaten“ hinzu.
Dies ermöglicht es dem Leser, die inzwischen eingeübte Praxis des Auswärtigen Amtes zu vergleichen und kritisch zu hinterfragen. Damit schließt die Neuauflage eine Lücke auch auf dem Gebiet des Völkerrechts.
Die Kommentierung stellt die Entwicklungen auf dem Gebiet des Diplomatenrechts und des Rechts der konsularischen Beziehungen auf dem aktuellsten Stand vor.
Ivor Roberts (Univ. of Oxford) has published the sixth edition of Satow's Diplomatic Practice (Oxford Univ. Press 2009). Here's the abstract:Satow's Diplomatic Practice is a classic work, first published 90 years ago and revised four times since. This is the first revised edition for thirty years, during which time the world and diplomacy have changed almost beyond recognition. The new edition provides an enlarged and updated section on the history of diplomacy and revises comprehensively the practice of diplomacy and the corpus of diplomatic and international law since the end of the Cold War. It traces the substantial expansion in numbers both of sovereign states and international and regional organisations and features detailed chapters on diplomatic privileges and immunities, diplomatic missions and consular matters. It also examines new forms of diplomacy from the work of NGOs to the use of secret envoys and commercial security firms, and the book highlights the impact of international terrorism on the life and work of a diplomat. Satow is an indispensable guide for anyone working in or studying the field of diplomacy.
Luke T. Lee & John Quigley (Ohio State Univ. - Law) have published the third edition of Consular Law and Practice (Oxford Univ. Press 2008). Here's the abstract:When persons are out of their home country, consuls are their link with home and a source of assistance. The roles of consuls are many and varied. Consuls promote commerce between the home country and the host country and assist businesspeople in making contacts and in completing commercial transactions. Consuls also handle problems that arise for seafarers and merchant shipping vessels of the home country when they are in port in the host country. When a home country citizen dies while in the host country, consuls may facilitate burial or shipment of the remains home, or deal with the person's estate. Consuls assist individuals arrested on a criminal charge in the host state by visiting them in jail, advising them about the legal system of the host state, and helping to find them a lawyer. If the person is convicted, consuls visit them in prison and may help to secure a transfer to a prison in the home country.
This fully updated third edition explains consular privileges and immunities and how consular functions are handled in time of peace and war, when the receiving state experiences civil war, or when the sending and receiving states break off diplomatic or consular relations. It provides valuable background by describing how consular law developed historically and how it became solidified in 1963 in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. It explores the many bilateral consular treaties which supplement the Vienna Convention, examines the traditional and changing role of consuls, explains diplomatic privileges and immunities, and discusses the function of consuls as ambassadors in cultural and scientific exchange.
Eileen Denza (University College London - Law) has published the third edition of Diplomatic Law: Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (Oxford Univ. Press 2008). Here's the abstract:Diplomatic Law was first published in 1976. Written with the benefit of the author's deep and practical understanding of the subject as a Legal Counsellor in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, it has become widely regarded as the leading work in the field. Denza places each provision of the Convention in its historical context; provides commentary on the application of the Convention by the UK, the US, and other States; and thoroughly examines topical problems in the field including the abuse of diplomatic immunity and terrorist violence. This fully updated new edition also highlights important new trends in the application of the Convention regime. It explores the interaction between State and diplomatic immunity (as shown in the Pinochet case), examines methods of establishing and conducting diplomatic relations under conditions of physical danger, and looks at increased evidence of disregard for the rules of secrecy in diplomatic communications. Denza also explores and the greater latitude for diplomats to 'interfere' in the internal affairs of the receiving State in the interest of protecting human rights and evaluates the impact of adoption of the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property.
