Diplomatic immunity

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, and Vienna

Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 are the two rules that govern
diplomatic immunity. These were framed after World War II to formalize
the customary rules and make their application more uniform.
Diplomatic agents also enjoy complete immunity from the criminal
jurisdiction of the host countrys courts and thus cannot be prosecuted
no matter how serious the offense unless their immunity is waived by
the sending state.
Vienna convention 1961
o The treaty was adopted on 18 April 1961, by the United Nations
Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities held
in Vienna, Austria, and first implemented on 24 April 1964
o international treaty that defines a framework for diplomatic
relations between independent countries
o specifies the privileges of a diplomatic mission that enable
diplomats to perform their function without fear of coercion or
harassment by the host country , known as diplomatic immunity
o The treaty is an extensive document, containing 53 articles
o Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an
embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host
country except by permission of the head of the mission.
Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from
intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the
premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends
this provision to the private residence of the diplomats.
/* Was in controversary recently due to NSA( National Security Agency
U.S): snooping program PRISM. Highly touted as Uncle SAMs listening
: like Sallu in BIG BOSS */

(Pasting from THE HINDU for a quick recap )

Vienna convention 1963
o a framework for consular relations between independent
countries
o A consul normally operates out of an embassy in another
country, and performs two functions:

protecting in the host country the interests of their

countrymen, and

furthering the commercial and economic relations

between the two countries
o a consul is not a diplomat, but they work out of the same
premises, and under this treaty they are afforded most of the
same privileges known as consular immunity
o This convention guarantees freedom from detention until trial
and conviction, except for grave offences.
o In March 2005, the United States pulled out of the Optional
Protocol to the Convention, which allows the International Court
of Justice to have compulsory jurisdiction over disputes arising
under the Convention
The Saga of Devyani Khobragade :
o She was Acting Consul General in New York
o Accused of fraud visa charges and underpaying maid
o Arrested and strip searched by U.S Marshals
/* For detailed case history :
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/laffairkhobragade-a-tale-of-two-narratives/article5479354.ece */

What the big boss says? :

o According to U.S State Department handbook: Consular officers
have only official acts or functional immunity in respect of both
criminal and civil matters and their personal inviolability is quite
limited. Consular officers may be arrested or detained pending
trial only if the offense is a felony and that the arrest is made
pursuant to a decision by a competent judicial authority (e.g., a
warrant issued by an appropriate court). They can be prosecuted
for misdemeanors, but remain at liberty pending trial or other
disposition of charges. Property of consular officers is not
inviolable. Consular officers are not obliged to provide evidence
as witnesses in connection with matters involving their official
duties, to produce official documents, or to provide expert
witness testimony on the laws of the sending country. Absent a
bilateral agreement, the family members of consular officers
enjoy no personal inviolability and no jurisdictional immunity of
any kind.
U.S Violations of Vienna convention:
o invoked the 1961 pact two years back(2011) when CIA
contractor Raymond Allen Davis was being tried for murder in
Pakistan.
Davis was released after he paid the families of the two
men killed $2.4 million
o Nicaragua case -1980s
The ICJ (International court of Justice) held that Washington
violated international law both by supporting the contras in
their insurrection against the Nicaraguan government and
by mining Nicaraguas harbours.
U.S refused to participate in proceedings and blocked
enforcement of ICJs judgment by UNSC . Thus depriving
any compensation for Nicaragua

Arguments :
o For :
Everyone irrespective of the cadre should obey law of land
India charged of modern slavery : ill treatment of domestic
helps
o Against :

U.S conducting in unilateralist approach ( BOSS Akshay

+ sallu style)
Can a Wage dispute between a consul and her domestic
help qualify as a grave offence?
U.S itself has violated convention in Pakistan , Libya and
Nicaragua ( cases)
Compared with China setting up of ADIZ(Air defense
identification zone)

Aruna S.
References
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/nsa-targets-indian-politics-spacenprogrammes/article5161299.ece
http://news.oneindia.in/india/points-know-about-vienna-convention-ondiplomatic-relations-1360736.html
http://en.wikipedia.org
http://www.mfa.gov.tr