top of page

Ignoramuses in Glass Houses Throwing Stones

Ignoramuses in Glass Houses Throwing Stones

Ambassador Prabhat P Shukla

Saying “Assassination Wanted” a poster in Canada raised by Khalistan supporters provide pictures of senior Indian diplomats serving in Canada. The Canadian Government defends this as freedom of expression.

For those interested in the rights and wrongs of the current dispute between India and Canada over the Geneva Convention on Diplomatic Relations, here are the relevant articles. The link to the full text of the Convention follows at the end.

A straightforward reading of the text of Article 22 will show that Canada has signally failed to protect the premises and personnel of the Indian Diplomatic Missions, as they are obliged to do under the Convention. They have been flouting this for months, if not years.

As for the Indian position demanding a reduction in the size of the Canadian Mission staff, Articles 9 and 11 make it clear beyond peradventure that the receiving State [India in this case] has the right not only to ask for the withdrawal of the Head of Mission and any other member without assigning any reason. Equally, the receiving State has an absolute right to regulate the size of a Diplomatic Mission.

India’s actions thus are completely in accord with the Vienna Convention; it is Canadian actions that are not.

Morons in glass houses do throw stones.

Article 9

1.The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata or that any other member of the staff of the mission is not acceptable. In any such case, the sending State shall, as appropriate, either recall the person concerned or terminate his functions with the mission. A person may be declared non grata or not acceptable before arriving in the territory of the receiving State

Article 11

1.In the absence of specific agreement as to the size of the mission, the receiving State may require that the size of a mission be kept within limits considered by it to be reasonable and normal, having regard to circumstances and conditions in the receiving State and to the needs of the particular mission.

2.The receiving State may equally, within similar bounds and on a non-discriminatory basis, refuse to accept officials of a particular category

Article 22

1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.

2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity.

3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.

15 views0 comments


bottom of page