CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

PETR VÁLEK CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ Specifically, the significance of the principle of compliance with international law is both symbolic and practical. On the symbolic level, it is a conviction of the author of the present article that compliance with international law should be at the core of the foreign policy of a State that has been a victim of aggression twice and that its decision makers – in particular those at the Foreign Ministry – have that in mind. As a result of its historic experience, the Czech Republic was the twenty-third State to ratify the Kampala Amendment to the Rome Statute on the definition of the crime of aggression. In this context, it is worth noting that the perpetrators prosecuted on the basis of international criminal law were not always those wearing a uniform or being in charge of a State. In fact, in the so-called “Ministries Trial”, held by the United States pursuant to the Allied Control Council Law No. 10 in Nuremberg from 1947 to 1949, 21 individuals were tried for crimes against peace, mainly the high foreign service officers from the German Foreign Ministry, so this process is also known as the “Wilhelmstrasse Trial” (according to the Berlin address of the German Foreign Ministry). 3 The group of defendants included, inter alia , Mr. Ernst von Weizsäcker, the former Secretary of State and father of H.E. Richard von Weizsäcker, the President of Germany. Making the compliance with international law a principle for exercise of the Czech foreign service thus might prevent the Czech diplomats from getting into a similar clash with international law like these German diplomats. The practical significance of the principle of compliance with international law is related to the fact that the knowledge of this subject across the whole Czech foreign service is, unfortunately, relatively limited. The lectures in international law are organized by the Diplomatic Academy and presented by the International Law Department every year; nevertheless, this issue cannot be solved quickly. Yet the potential damages that can be caused by ignorance of the rules of international law will always be substantial, in particular in the sphere of jurisdictional immunities of States and their property or diplomatic privileges and immunities. Sometimes, it may not be the ignorance, but rather the abuse of these privileges and immunities. Therefore, this principle is further elaborated, inter alia , in § 47 of the Act on Foreign Service which lists the duties of the “diplomatic, administrative and technical employees”. They “must not…abuse the privileges and immunities granted by the treaties that are binding on the Czech Republic, or by the law of the receiving State, abuse diplomatic or service passport”, and they “are further obliged to…comply with duties and restrictions…imposed by treaties that are binding on the Czech Republic and, without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, to respect the law of the receiving State” (this wording is based partly on Article 41(1) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations). The author of this Article is certainly not naive that, starting with the entry into force of the Act on Foreign Service, all conduct of persons falling under the scope of this Act will be strictly in line with international law. Nevertheless, now when the above-stated duties are clearly set out by the law, their violation will constitute a “disciplinary offence” defined by § 88 of the Act on State Service, for which a “disciplinary measure” under § 89 of this Act may be imposed. Such a “disciplinary measure” may amount to “removal from a superior service post” or even to “discharge from the service relationship” ( i.e. , losing the job at the Foreign Ministry). As such, this enforcement mechanism should provide sufficient “motivation”

568

3 JESCHECK, H.-H., Nuremberg Trials, in: Encyclopedia of Public International Law , Vol. III, 1997, p. 752.