The Applicant Request for Information Is Ill-Founded: The Respontent Denial For Information Is in Compliance with Art. VI of the 1985 Treaty

The Applicant Request for Information Is Ill-Founded: The Respontent Denial For Information Is in Compliance with Art. VI of the 1985 Treaty

Length: 692 words (2 double-spaced pages)

Rating: Better Essays

Open Document

Essay Preview

In 1985, the parties to the current dispute have concluded a treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (hereinafter 1985 Treaty). According to the treaty, were certain condition at Art. V respected the Respondent shall transmit to the counterpart only the information that the Respondent deems relevant to the alleged criminal offences. Additionally, Art. VI provides that:
“[a]assistance may be refused when the execution of the request would seriously impair sovereignty, national security, or other essential public interests or for any reason provided by [the Respondent] domestic law.”
Furthermore, jurisdiction has to be considered as a prerequisite in order for the Applicant to require information.
In fact, according to the 1985 Treaty, the Respondent would be required to provide information only whether the jurisdiction of the Applicant was found over the present dispute. Accordingly, the Respondent has submitted that the Applicant has no jurisdiction over the present dispute. Hence, the Respondent is not required by the 1985 Treaty to provide the requested information.
Art. V of the 1985 Treaty requires Applicant to provide at least certain information considered essential in order for the Respondent to execute the request. Among the others Applicant is required to acknowledge the Respondent of:
“the purpose for which the request for information is made and the nature of the assistance sought.”
The information required by Art. V shall be considered indispensable in order for the Applicant to determine the relevant information to transmit to the counterpart. The Respondent maintains that the Applicant has failed to render all the essential information pr...

... middle of paper ...

...n fact, as already clarified by the Respondent its domestic law provides the secrecy of the operations carried out by the special forces . Moreover, the Respondent cannot render further explanation in order not to compromise the on-going intelligence-sharing relationship with a third country. In Djibouti v. France this honorable Court held that the execution of the request must comply with the requested State domestic law . In fact, the requested State:
“while it must of course ensure that the procedure is put in motion, the State does not thereby guarantee the outcome, in the sense of the transmission of the file requested in the letter rogatory.”
In conclusion, the Respondent submits that the denial of providing the requested information is in accordance with Art. IV and, therefore, the Respondent is not in breached of its legal obligations under the 1985 Treaty.

Need Writing Help?

Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.

Check your paper »