US (and French) Courts Have Ruled Head-of-State Immunity is Absolute on traveling

[Ichingcarpenter]

It is clear that the entrapment and forced landing in Austria of the official airplane carrying Bolivian President Evo Morales was the work of the US, which was obviously behind the decision by France and Portugal to deny air rights to the flight, and which also was obviously behind the Austrian government’s demand to be allowed to search the jet after it landed. After all, those countries have no interest themselves in capturing US National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, who is only Obama’s and the NSA’s quarry.

So it is worth examining how the US views the legal status of heads of state under international law and custom.

In 2004, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (New York) ruled that Robert Mugabe, the corrupt and brutal leader of Zimbabwe, enjoyed “absolute immunity” while inside the US on a visit to New York. The decision stemmed from 2001, when a group of citizens of Zimbabwe sought to have Mugabe arrested in New York on charges of “extrajudicial killing, torture, terrorism, rape, beatings and other acts of violence and destruction.” A month earlier, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Chicago), reached a similar conclusion in a case involving then Chinese President Jiang Zemin.

The US government had filed briefs in both those cases arguing that both Jiang and Mugabe (as well as Mugabe’s foreign minister, who was traveling with him), had absolute immunity as traveling heads of state. Interestingly, the US brief, in addition to citing the Vienna Convention, cited the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), signed into law by Pres. Gerald Ford, which among other things makes sovereign leaders absolutely immune. Ironically, that law was successfully used by by leaders of Saudi Arabia to convince US courts to immunize them against civil suits filed against them by victims of the 9-11 attacks, who had claimed Saudi leaders had funded the attacks.

No surprise that the US would want sovereign immunity, given that the head of state of the US at the time of the court proceedings and the Appellate Court hearing, George W. Bush, and his vice president Dick Cheney, were already themselves guilty of serious war crimes and crimes against humanity for their illegal invasion of Iraq, their authorization of kidnappings, extrajudicial killings and torture, and their financing of acts of terrorism. They understandably wanted to establish that nobody should even think about trying to embarrass them with an arrest warrant for these crimes during any trips abroad.

more:

http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/1850

[leftstreet]

1. But Bolivia's not a 'real' country

South America is mostly just colonies still. Even John Kerry says Bolivia's just the 'backyard' of the USA!! USA!! USA!!

DURec

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. Same with rendition waterboarding, indefinite detention.

they are just quaint UN no, noes the US doesn't have to pay attention to.

South america is just our abused little cousin we beat up on we have our own laws suckers.

[indepat]

7. Heads should roll (metaphorically of course) over this most egregious diplomatic gaffe

that has imo caused serious damage to our international reputation and standing.

[morningfog]

2. Article 54 of the 1963 Convention on Consular Rights.

Article 54
Obligations of third States
1.If a consular officer passes through or is in the territory of a third State, which has granted him
a visa if a visa was necessary, while proceeding to take up or return to his post or when returning to the
sending State, the third State shall accord to him all immunities provided for by the other articles of the
present Convention as may be required to ensure his transit or return. The same shall apply in the case of
any member of his family forming part of his household enjoying such privileges and immunities who
are accompanying the consular officer or travelling separately to join him or to return to the sending
State.

2.In circumstances similar to those specified in paragraph 1 of this article, third States shall not
hinder the transit through their territory of other members of the consular post or of members of their
families forming part of their households.

3.Third States shall accord to official correspondence and to other official communications in
transit, including messages in code or cipher, the same freedom and protection as the receiving State is
bound to accord under the present Convention. They shall accord to consular couriers who have been
granted a visa, if a visa was necessary, and to consular bags in transit, the same inviolability and
protection as the receiving State is bound to accord under the present Convention.

4.The obligations of third States under paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this article shall also apply to the
persons mentioned respectively in those paragraphs, and to official communications and to consular
bags, whose presence in the territory of the third State is due to force majeure.

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_2_1963.pdf

[Savannahmann]

4. Oh look it's nothing

That's what the perpetual apologists will claim with their little rolling smiles. It doesn't matter that all sorts of international treaties and conventions were violated. It's Bolivia, it's not like they have a military, besides what can they do.

Sickens me, to think that after a century, we're still wrapped up in the whole colonial mentality.

[Downwinder]

5. We have come a long way (down)

since we escorted the Japanese Ambassador out of the country after Pearl Harbor.

[Catherina]

6. Spain knew that also. They all did.

July 2, 2013 22:36pm Spanish time

The Government, on alert to the risk that Snowden travels on the plane of Evo Morales

The Bolivian President asked for authorization to make an early morning stopover in Spain

Yesterday Bolivia's President Evo Morales asked the Spanish government for authorization to make a stopover in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria from Moscow, where he attended the Forum of Gas Exporting Countries. Given the possibility that the former CIA analyst Edward Snowden, would travel with the Bolivian President and decide to seek asylum on Spanish territory, the government has organized a special National Police detail to prevent the former agent from landing in the presidential plane and making an asylum request in Spain.

However, yesterday sources said on ABC Affairs that if Snowden were to make such a request, (Spain) "would not be forced to substantiate it judicially." The same sources told ABC that the (Ministry of) Foreign Affairs had received all Bolivian government guarantees that Edward Snowden was not traveling on Evo Morales Presidential jet.

(they skip over to the case study they made for Venezuela)
...

Since flights returning to Venezuela usually make a stopover in Spain, the authorities of our country studied the situation that could arise and what actions they could take if the United States asked Spain to detain Snowden during the stopover. According to these same sources, legal experts considered that Spain could not act upon a hypothetical U.S. request, because security forces can not enter the plane of the State Venezuela or even ask for a list of people on board.

http://www.abc.es/internacional/20130702/abci-snowden-maduro-espana-201307021752.html

and yet, there was Spain refusing authorization for hours unless President Morales agreed to an inspection. Oh and wasn't their little Spanish Ambassador cute running up to the plane with coffee, offering Morales coffee! so he could get on the plane and look around. He got as far as the front door with his stupid coffee offer and no further.

"I rejected the offer (of coffee), of course, out of dignity. I have the obligation to defend the dignity and sovereignty of my position because it's not an offense to a president, it's an offense to the whole nation and to the whole region of Latin America."

http://www.rferl.org/content/snowden-bolivia-morales-plane-rerouted-europe/25034923.html