SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 2

DIPLOMATIC FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND TRAVEL GRANTED TO DIPLOMATIC AGENTS

DİPLOMATİK TEMSİLCİLER VE ONLARA TANINAN HAREKET VE SEYAHAT SERBESTİSİ

Anıl Çamyamaç0000-0002-8476-9110
Pages
457–486
Publication Date
2019-12-26
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Thus, the main purpose of this article is to analyze the freedom of movement and travel in diplomatic relations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Diplomatic privileges and immunities are indeed the necessities of diplomatic life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This kind of rule first placed in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations in article 26.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Thus, the main purpose of this article is to analyze the freedom of movement and travel in diplomatic relations.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Hareket ve Seyahat Serbestisi · Diplomatik Ajanlar · Diplomatik Ayrıcalık ve Bağışıklıklar

Abstract

Diplomatic privileges and immunities are indeed the necessities of diplomatic life. Without them it would have been impossible for diplomatic agents to fulfil their duties. In other words, these privileges and immunities ensure the way of diplomatic life in a sense. Among these privileges and immunities is the freedom of movement and travel. This freedom ensures free movement and travel of foreign diplomat or members of a diplomatic mission and their families in the state to which they are sent. In reality for a long time there was no such regulation for freedom of movement and travel since no state, except in exceptional cases or conditions, as it appears, had a mind to restrict this kind of freedom. That is because the functions of diplomatic mission necessitate this kind of freedom. Unfortunately with the commencement of the Second World War, this situation had dramatically changed. After the war particularly Communist States had restricted this right. Following the Communist States’ practice the Western States put restrictions for the members of the diplomatic missions of the Communist States to their freedom of movement and travel in the name of reciprocity, as well. This situation necessitated a provision for the freedom movement and travel. This kind of rule first placed in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations in article 26. Provisions alike were inserted in the following documents concerned. Thus, the main purpose of this article is to analyze the freedom of movement and travel in diplomatic relations.

Özet

Diplomatik ayrıcalık ve bağışıklıklar diplomatik hayatın vazgeçilmez

🔖

Cite This Article

Çamyamaç, A. (2019). DIPLOMATIC FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND TRAVEL GRANTED TO DIPLOMATIC AGENTS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 2, 457–486. https://doi.org/10.33717/deuhfd.642016

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (52)

  1. Aybay, R.: Tarih ve Hukuk Açısından Konsolosluk, İstanbul, 2009.
  2. Clark, E.: Corps Diplomatique, Bristol, 1973.
  3. Cohen, J. A. & Chiu, H. (eds.), People’s China and International Law: A Documentary Study, vol. II, New Jersey, 1974.
  4. Delupis, I.: International Law and the Independent State, Essex, 1974.
  5. Denza, E.: Diplomatic Law: Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, New York, 1976.
  6. Denza, E.: Diplomatic Law: Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 3rd Edition, Oxford, 2008.
  7. Denza, E.: Diplomatic Law: Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 4th Edition, Oxford, 2016.
  8. do Nascimento e Silva, G. E.: Diplomacy in International Law, Leiden, 1972.
  9. Fravel, M. T.: Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China’s Territorial Disputes, New Jersey, 2008.
  10. Goldsmith, J. L. & Posner, E. A.: The Limits of International Law, Oxford, 2005.
  11. Gore-Booth, H. P.: Satow’s Guide to Diplomatic Practice, 5th Edition, Essex, 1994. (7th Impression of the 1979 Edition)
  12. Grzybowski, K.: Soviet Public International Law: Doctrines and Diplomatic Practice, Leyden, 1970.
  13. Hardy, M.: Modern Diplomatic Law, Manchester, 1968. Hyde, C. C.: International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the
  14. United States, vol. II, 2nd Revised Edition, Boston, 1947.
  15. Ismail, M. B. A.: Islamic Law and Transnational Diplomatic Law: A Quest for Complementarity in Divergent Legal Theories, Hampshire, 2016.
  16. Lee, L. T.: Consular Law and Practice, 2nd Edition, Oxford, 1991.
  17. McClanahan, G. V.: Diplomatic Immunity: Principles, Practices, Problems, London, 1989.
  18. Murty, B. S.: The International Law of Diplomacy: The Diplomatic Instrument and World Public Order, New Haven,, 1989.
  19. Nicholson, H.: The Evolution of Diplomatic Method, Oxford, 1954. (reprinted in 2011 by Leicester University)
  20. Ogdon, M.: Juridical Bases of Diplomatic Immunity: A Study in the Origin, Growth and Purpose of the Law, Washington D.C., 1936.
  21. Pazarcı, H.: Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri, III. Kitap, Gözden Geçirilmiş Baskı, Ankara, 1999.
  22. Rana, K. S.: The Contemporary Embassy: Paths to Diplomatic Excellence, London, 2013.
  23. Reçber, K.: Diplomasi ve Konsolosluk Hukuku, Bursa, 2011.
  24. Sen, B.: A Diplomat’s Handbook of International Law and Practice, The Hague, 1965.
  25. Starke, J. G.: Introduction to International Law, 10th Edition, London, 1989.
  26. von Glahn, G., Law Among Nations: An Introduction to Public International Law, 7th Edition, New York, 1996.
  27. Wiegand, K. E.: Enduring Territorial Disputes: Strategies of Bargaining, Coercive Diplomacy, and Settlement, Georgia, 2011.
  28. Bruns, K.: On the Road to Vienna: The Role of the International Law Commission in the Codification of Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities, 1949-1958, in Diplomatic Law in a New Millennium, edited by Behrens, Oxford, 2017, s. 54-71.
  29. Cahier, P.: Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, International Conciliation, vol. 37, 1967, s. 5-40.
  30. Duquet, S. & Wouters, J.: Legal Duties of Diplomats Today, in Diplomatic Law in a New Millennium, edited by Behrens, Oxford, 2017, s. 247- 271.
  31. Economidès, C. P.: Le mont Athos et le droit international, Revue hellénique de droit international, vol. 38/1, 1985/86, s. 289-294.
  32. Elgavish, D.: Did Diplomatic Immunity Exist in the Ancient Near East, Journal of History of International Law, vol. 2/1, 2000, s. 73-90.
  33. Farooque, M.: Persona Non-Grata: Victim of Non-Grata Conducts, Indian Journal of International Law, vol. 28/1, 1988, s. 94-103.
  34. Grzybowski, K.: The Regime of Diplomacy and the Tehran Hostages, International & Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 30/1, 1981, s. 42-58.
  35. Ismail, M. B. A.: Justifications and Principles of Diplomatic Immunity: A Comparison between Islamic International Law and International Law, Journal of Islamic State Practice in International Law, vol. 9/1, 2013, s. 60-101.
  36. Koniradis, I. M.: The Mount Athos Avaton, Revue hellénique de droit international, vol. 53/1, 2000, s. 215-226.
  37. Lauterpacht, E.: The Codification of the Law of Diplomatic Immunity, Transactions of the Grotius Society, vol. 40, 1954, s. 65-81.
  38. Liang, Y. L.: Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities as a Subject for Codification, American Journal of International Law, vol. 47/3, 1953, s. 439-448.
  39. Lyons, B. A.: Personal Immunities of Diplomatic Agents, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 31, 1954, s. 299-340.
  40. Morris, W. G.: Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and Immunity, Hofstra Law Review, vol. 36/3, 2007, s. 601-638.
  41. Nahlik, S. E.: Development of Diplomatic Law. Selected Problems, Recueil des cours, vol. 222, 1990-III, 1990, s. 187-364.
  42. Papastathis, C. K.: The Regime of Mount Athos, in Between Cultural Diversity and Common Heritage: Legal and Religious Perspectives on the Sacred Places of the Mediterranean, edited by Ferrari & Benzo, Surrey, 2014, s. 273-292.
  43. Partsch, K. J.: Reprisals, Encyclopedia of Public International Law: International Relations and Legal Cooperation in General-Diplomatic and Consular Relations, vol. 9, edited by Bernhardt, Amsterdam, 1986, s. 330-335.
  44. Partsch, K. J.: Retorsions, Encyclopedia of Public International Law: International Relations and Legal Cooperation in General-Diplomatic and Consular Relations, vol. 9, edited by Bernhardt, Amsterdam, 1986, s. 335-337.
  45. Przetacznik, F.: Reaffirmation of Basic Principles of Diplomatic and Consular Law by the International Court of Justice in the American Diplomatic Case in Iran, Sri Lanka Journal of International Law, vol. 3/1, 1991, s. 119-152.
  46. Roye, P. F.: Reforming the Laws and Practice of Diplomatic Immunity, University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, vol. 12/1, 1978, s. 91- 111.
  47. Siekmann, R. C. R.: Netherlands State Practice fort he Parliament Year 1978-1979, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 11, 1980, s. 193-257.
  48. Tease, A. M.: Diplomatic Immunity and Divorce: Fernandez v. Fernandez, Connecticut Law Review, vol. 21/5, 1989, s. 1071-1095.
  49. Turack, D. C.: A Brief Review of the Provisions in Recent Agreements Concerning Freedom of Movement Issues in the Modern World, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol. 11/1, 1979, s. 95- 115.
  50. Witiw, E. P.: Persona Non Grata: Expelling Diplomats Who Abuse Their Privileges, New York Law School Journal of International & Comparative Law, vol. 9/2, 1988, s. 345-359.
  51. Young, E.: The Development of the Law of Diplomatic Relations, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 40, 1964, s. 141-182.
  52. Zoglio, E. M.: Diplomatic Immunity from Local Jurisdiction, University of Baltimore Law Forum, vol. 7/2, 1977, s. 33-36.