Skip to main content

VIENNA CONVENTION AND KULBHUSHAN CASE

 VIENNA CONVENTION AND KULBHUSHAN CASE 



INTRODUCTION

The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations is an international treaty that establishes a framework for sovereign states' consular relations. Many consular practices that arose from state custom and other bilateral agreements between states are codified in it.

Consuls have traditionally been employed to represent the interests of countries or their citizens in another country's embassy or consulate. The Convention outlines and articulates the functions, rights, and immunities bestowed on consular officers and their offices, as well as the rights and responsibilities of receiving States and sending States.

Following the United Nations Conference on Consular Relations, which took place in Vienna, Austria from March 4 to April 22, 1963, the Convention was adopted on April 24, 1963.




INDIA AND VIENNA CONVENTION

In 1965, India signed the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. To give effect to the Vienna Convention, India adopted the Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) told the United Nations General Assembly in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case that Pakistan had breached the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by refusing Jadhav consular access. Pakistan had asserted incorrectly that the convention did not apply to anyone suspected of espionage in this case. The ICJ further stated that Pakistan's notification of Jadhav's arrest to the Indian consulate three weeks after his arrest was in contravention of the convention's requirements.


FACTS OF KULBHUSHAN JADHAV CASE

In April 2017, a Pakistani military court sentenced Kulbhushan Jadhav to death on allegations of espionage and terrorism.

India filed a complaint with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Pakistan for denying Jadhav consular access (Vienna Convention) and contesting his death sentence.

In July 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Pakistan must conduct a "effective review and reconsideration" of Jadhav's conviction and sentence, as well as provide India immediate consular access.


It had asked Pakistan to offer a proper mechanism for appealing the military court's sentence against Jadhav.


EFFECTIVE REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION' FOR INDIA

Effective review and reconsideration is a phrase that is not to be confused with the term "review" as used in a domestic setting. It entails granting consular access and assisting Jadhav with his defense preparation

It meant Pakistan to provide the charges as well as the proof, which it had kept secret up to that point. Pakistan was also asked to reveal the circumstances in which the military compelled Jadhav to confess. It meant that Jadhav was to defend himself in whatever venue or court that hears his case. 


ROLE  AND RULING OF ICJ IN KULBHUSHAN CASE 


The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the United Nations' main judicial body (UN). As the successor of the Permanent Court of International Justice, it was founded in 1945 by a UN Charter and began operation in 1946.

It resolves legal disputes between member countries and provides advice to UN Organs and Specialized Agencies.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) approved India's request for consular access for Kulbhushan Jadhav and agreed that Pakistan had violated the rights set forth in Article 36 of the Vienna Convention.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree