Even though the picture of such intervention has significantly changed, it cannot be said that it is over.ĭiplomats attempt to establish themselves as a means of solving problems in the name of election-centred compromise, opening the door to entering into the country's national politics. The battle for power among various groups in the following years provoked foreign diplomats to meddle overtly or covertly in the country's national affairs. Just three and half years after Bangladesh's independence, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated, throwing the newly-born nation into a political dilemma. Bangladesh, which gained independence in 1971 after a bloody Liberation War, struggled to build solid democratic foundations. Rather, it is a persistent issue that has repeatedly resurfaced throughout history. The tendency of foreign diplomats to intervene in developing countries is not a new development in international politics. But when they criticize Bangladesh’s democratic elections, high level of development, and commitment to human rights and freedoms, they appear as “preachers of democracy,” which only serves to highlight their attempt to destabilize our nation and halt Bangladesh’s progress toward achieving an honourable reputation on the global stage. Some nations and their diplomats based in Dhaka have chosen to disregard the fact that Bangladesh’s democracy has grown and that the majority of the population wants peace and prosperity for the region.
It is observed that diplomats have been publicly commenting in front of the media on the fairness and environment for voting in the upcoming elections, which in no way fall under the purview of traditional diplomacy.
The principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of States also signifies that a State should not otherwise intervene in a dictatorial way in the internal affairs of other States.Ī number of foreign diplomats in Dhaka have been discussing about our internal affairs for quite some time now. In addition, the Charter of United Nations and the International Court of Justice reaffirmed non-intervention as a norm of customary international law. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that state." It reminds diplomats to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state and unequivocally restricts them from meddling in that nation's domestic affairs.ĭiplomats are privileged, and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations exempts them from legal action, taxation, and a host of other things in the host country, but restricts them unequivocally, by the provisions of Article 41 paragraph 1, from interfering in the internal affairs of the host country. Article 41 paragraph 1 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations states in unequivocal terms: "Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state. The Convention requires diplomats to obey local laws. As is stated in the preamble of the Convention, the rules are intended to facilitate the development of friendly relations among nations, irrespective of their differing constitutional and social systems.
The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations outlines the rules of diplomatic law and codifies the rules for the exchange and treatment of envoys between states, which have been firmly established in customary law for hundreds of years.
0 kommentar(er)
