STATE JURISDICTION

233
The International Court of Justice held
by 13 to 3 votes that the issue of the
international circulation of the disputed arrest warrant had failed to respect the irimunity
from criminal jurisdiction and inviolability which Mr. Yerodia enjoyed under international
w
law Clarifying the scope of immunity enjoyed by Minister of Affairs,
Foreign of ForeigntheAftairs,
oncluded that throughout the duration of his or her office a Minister court
con
e n abroad,
w hen
enjoys full immunity from criminal jurisdiction and inviolability. This is the
case whether the Minister is present in foreign territory in an 'official' or 'private' capacity
hether the acts in question were performed before he or she assumed office as
or during the period ot o'"ice, and finally, whether, the acts were perforrned in an official or Minister
orivate capacity. Iherefore, the Court ordered that Belgium by means of its own choosing9
cancel the arrest warrant and to inform the authorities to whom the warrant had been
cancelled. Thus the judgment for the first time defined the scope of the immunities of
Foreign Affairsand thereby contributed to the development of international law in a field of
great topical interest.

N.B-For criminal jurisdiction under International law see also matter discussed
earlier under the heading "Extra-territorial Operation of State Laws and Protective
Jurisdiction of State Over Foreigners' in this Chapter.
Some lllustrations

) K. a British subject,fires across the channel and kills a Frenchman on the shore
of France In this case Britain has jurisdiction over criminal K because K is a British
subject and the crimeis committed within the territory of Britain. France can also claim
jurisdiction because though the crime was initiated in Britain, it was completed or
consummated in the French territory. Moreover, the effect of the crime initiated in Britain
fell on French territory. So if K goes to France, he can be apprehended and tried for
murder.

(i) K, an Indian subject, obtains money by false pretences by means of letters

posted in Bhutan to a recipient in Pakistan." K can be tried by Bhutan in whose territory
the crime was committed by India, whose subject he is and also by Pakistan in whose
teritory the effect of the crime falls
(ii) K, an American national, published in Texas a libel against a Mexican citizen,
Later, K is in Mexico on a temporary visit and is arrested by the Mexican Government for
prosecution. The Government of the United States protests against this.** In view of the
law relating to criminal jurisdiction in international law, and general jurisprudence relating
to criminal responsibility under municipal law discussed above, Mexican Government is
within its right to arrest K for prosecution because the effect of the crime initiated in
America fell on Mexico and protest of U.S. is not justified.
Criminal jurisdiction of the Coastal State in the Territorial Sea.-The sovereignty of a
coastal State aiso extends to its territorial sea. This is, however, subject to the condition
that ships of all States enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea. So
far merchant ships are concerned, Article 19(1) of the Geneva Convention on the
territorial sea and the contiguous zone, 1958, provides that the criminal jurisdiction of
Coastal State should not be exercised on board a foreign ship passing through the
territorial sea to arrest any person or to conduct any investigation in connection with any
Crime committed on board the ship during its passage, save only in the following cases
(a) If ihe consequences of the crime extend to the coastal State ; or (b) If the crime is of a
Kind to disturb the peace of the country or the good order of the territorial sea; or (c) If the
assistance of the local authorities has been requested by the captain of the ship or by the
Consul of the country whose flag the ship flies; or (d) lf it is necessary for the suppression
of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs. Article 19(2) provides that the above provisions do not

Asked in I.A.S. (1970), O. No. 5(a); Forthe answer of this and the two succeeding illustrations refer the
law as discussed above.
Asked in IAS (1970), Q. No. 5(b).
Asked in 1LA.S. (1970), Q. No. 5(c).