Vienna Convention on consular relations

Extract

[...] Iran) - Case Concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v United States of America), - Lagrand Case (Federal Republic of Germany v United States of America) - Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v United States of America) Legal instruments - Charter of the United Nations - Statute of the International Court of Justice - Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963 - Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, International Law Commission Thereafter Vienna Convention” Case Concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v United States of America), Provisional Measures, Order of 9 Apr ICJ Reports 1998. [...]

[...] Nevertheless, consular officers shall refrain from taking action on behalf of a national who is in prison, custody or detention if he expressly opposes such action The rights referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the receiving State, subject to the proviso, however, that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purposes for which the rights accorded under this Article are intended. [...]

[...] Breard; to adjudge and declare that in light of the United States' actions rendering it impossible for the Court to provide the remedy of restitutio in integrum, Paraguay, in its own right and in the exercise of diplomatic protection of its national, is entitled to payment by the United States, in an amount to be determined by the Court in a subsequent proceeding, of compensation, and moral damages as satisfaction; to adjudge and declare that, as a remedy for the United States' breach of the Provisional Measures Order and of its international legal obligation not to undertake any action that might prejudice any eventual decision in the case or aggravate the dispute, the Republic of Paraguay is entitled to payment by the United States, in an amount to be determined by the Court in a subsequent proceeding, of compensation, and moral damages as satisfaction.” Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963 Article 5 Consular Fucntions Consular functions consist in: 1. [...]

[...] Article 36 of the Convention is designed specifically to ensure that consuls do know of the detention of their nationals, and compliance with it is therefore indispensable to the effective performance of consular functions.[17] The Court finds that these considerations also apply to article 5. The violation of the Order for Provisional Measures The Court's Order was binding As specified in the UN Charter, Article the signatories have the obligation "to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party."[18] The question of whether an Order for Provisional Measures accounts to a Court's decision has been answered in the affirmative in recent Judgements of this Court that are to be followed. [...]

[...] Facts and Jurisdiction of the Court The Facts On 3 April 1998, the Republic of Paraguay filed an application related to alleged violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963[1] in the case of Mr. Angel Francisco Breard who had been arrested, tried, convinced and sentenced to death without being either informed of, or provided with his rights to consular assistance under that Convention. The Paraguay requested the Court to indicate Provisional Measures, i.e. the suspension of the sentence as long as the judgement was pending. [...]