There are 180 States parties to the Convention, including most un Member States and the UN observer States of the Holy See and the State of Palestine. [1] The signatory states that have not ratified the Convention are: the Central African Republic, Israel, Côte d`Ivoire and the Republic of Congo. The UN Member States that have neither signed nor ratified the Convention are: Afghanistan, Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, Ethiopia, Palau, San Marino, Solomon Islands, South Sudan and Uganda. Look for relevant state laws in subscription databases such as Westlaw and Lexis, e.B.: “Vienna Convention on Consular Relations” OR (notif! w/s consular consul w/s arrest! OR imprisonment OR imprisonment!) The Treaty contains 79 articles. [2] The preamble to the Convention states that customary international law continues to apply to matters not addressed in the Convention. [2] [4] The main provisions include. [2] · John Quigley, Application of Consular Rights to Foreign Nationals: Standard for Reversal of a Criminal Conviction, 11 ILSA J. Int`l & Comp. L. 403 (2005). In 1980, prior to its withdrawal from the Optional Protocol, the United States filed a complaint with the ICJ against Iran – the United States diplomatic and consular staff in Tehran (United States against Iran) – in response to the conquest of U.S.

diplomatic offices and personnel by revolutionary activists. [9] · William J. Aceves, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: A Study of Rights, Wrongs, and Remedies, 31 Vand. J. Transnat`l L. 257 (1998). · Equal Protection: Consular Assistance and Criminal Justice Procedures in the USA: An Introductory Guide for Consulates (Anne James & Joanne Cecil comps., 2e éd. 2005) · Anthony N. Bishop, The Unenforceable Rights to Consular Notification and Access in the United States: What’s Changed Since the LaGrand Case?, 25 Hous. J. Int’l L.

1 (2002). . · Laurence E. Rothenberg, Internationales Recht, US-Souveränität und die Todesstrafe, 35 Geo. J. Int’l L. 547 (2004). · Andrea Bianchi, International Law and U.S. Courts: The Myth of Lohengrin Revisited, 15 Eur.

J. Int’l L. 751 (2004). · Vertragsforschungsleitfäden können auch auf den Websites der Law School Library X gefunden werden. Bundesvorschriften über die konsularische Benachrichtigung bei Bundesverhaftungen · Mark J. Kadish, Artikel 36 des Wiener Übereinkommens über konsularische Beziehungen: Eine Suche nach dem Recht auf Konsul, 18 Mich. J. Int’l L. 565 (1997).

· Howard S. Schiffman, Breard and Beyond: The Status of Consular Notification and Access Under the Vienna Convention, 8 Cardozo J. Int’l & Comp. L. 27 (2000). · Thomas H. Lee, Making Sense of the Eleventh Amendment: International Law and State Sovereignty, 96 Nw. U. L. Rev.

1027 (2002). · Mark Weisburd, Internationale Gerichte und amerikanische Gerichte, 21 Mich. J. Int’l L. 877 (2000). · Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Breard, Printz und die Vertragsmacht, 70 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1317 (1999). · Jenny S. Martinez, Enforcing the Decisions of International Tribunals in the U.S.

Legal System, 45 Santa Clara L. Rev. 877 (2005). · Joan Fitzpatrick, The Unreality of International Law in the United States and the LaGrand Case, 27 Yale J. Int’l L. 427 (2002). Bande II: Anhänge; Wiener Übereinkommen über konsularische Beziehungen; Schlussakt; Fakultativprotokolle; Resolutionen · Mark Weisburd, International Judicial Decisions, Domestic Courts, and the Foreign Affairs Power, 2005 Cato Sup. Ct.

Rev. 287 (2004-2005). · William A. Schabas, Das Urteil des IGH gegen die Vereinigten Staaten: Geht es wirklich um die Todesstrafe? 27 Yale J. Int’l L. 445 (2002). · Bruno Simma et Carsten Hoppe, de LaGrand et Avena à Medellin – A Rocky Road towards Implementation, 14 Tul. J. Int’l & Comp.

L. 7 (2005). · John Quigley, International Attention to the Death Penalty: Texas as a Lightning Rod, 8 Tex. J. sur C.L. & C.R. 175 (2003). · Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Night and Day: Coeur d’Alene, Breard, and the Unraveling of the Prospective-Retrospective Distinction in Eleventh Amendment Doctrine, 87 Geo.

L.J. 1 (1998). · Julian G. Ku, Structural Conflicts in the Interpretation of Customary International Law, 45 Santa Clara L. Rev. 857 (2005). · International Law Commission – Summaries of the work of the International Law Commission – International Relations Law – Consular Traffic and Immunities The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations is an international treaty that establishes a framework for consular relations between sovereign States. It codifies many consular practices that have emerged from State practices and various bilateral agreements between States. [3] · John Cary Sims & Linda E. Carter, Emerging Importance of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as a Defense Tool, 22-Sept/Oct Champion 28 (Sept/Oct 1998). · Supreme Court rules on consular convention case – by Frederic L. Kyrgyzs · U.S.

Supreme Court – Opinions, Pleadings, Pleadings · Christian J. Tams, Recognition Guarantees and Assurances of Non-repetition: LaGrand and the Law of State Responsibility, 27 Yale J. Int`l L. 441 (2002). · Sean D. Murphy, U.S. position before the International Court of Justice in the Mexico death penalty case, 97 am. J. Int`l L. 434 (2003). · Michael John Garcia, Congressional Information Service, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: Overview of the United States Implementation and Interpretation by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) of Consular Notification Requirements (2004). 2.

The State exercising a right referred to in paragraph 1 shall fulfil the conditions for exercise laid down in the Treaty or laid down in accordance with the Treaty. · Rebecca E. Woodman, Miranda International? Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 70 J. Kan.B. Ass`n 41 (2001). Research Guide to the Vienna Convention on Obligations to Notify Consular Relations · Richard J. Wilson, International Law Issues in Death Penalty Defense, 31 Hofstra L. Rev. 1195 (2003). · Linda E. Carter, Compliance with ICJ Provisional Measures and the Meaning of Review and Rechecking Under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex c.

États-Unis), 25 Mich. J. Int’l L. 117 (2003). · Recueil des traités des Nations Unies : Manuel de référence des traités · Howard S. Schiffman, The LaGrand Decision: The Evolving Legal Landscape of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in the U.S. Death Penalty Cases, 42 Santa Clara L. Rev.

1099 (2002). · Joshua A. Brook, Federalism and Foreign Affairs: How to Remedy Violations of the Vienna Convention and Obey the U.S. Constitution, Too, 37 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 573 (2004). VI. Memorandum des Präsidenten, in dem die Einhaltung der Beschlüsse des IGH angeordnet wird · Linda E.

Carter, Lessons from Avena: The Inadequacy of Clemency and Judicial Proceedings for Violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 15 Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 259 (2005). · Victor M. Uribe, Consuls at Work: Universal Instruments of Human Rights and Consular Protection in the Context of Criminal Justice, 19 Hous. J. Int`l L. 375 (1997). c.

Einblicke der American Society of International Law (ASIL) · Linda E. Carter and John Cary Sims, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the Rights of Non-Citizen Criminal Defendants: The Lessons of Breard, 9 California Defender 47 (1999). · Sean D. Murphy, Implementation of the Oklahoma Court Avena Decision, 98 am. J. Int`l L. 581 (2004). Consuls have traditionally been appointed to represent the interests of the state or its nationals in an embassy or consulate in another country. The Convention defines and sets out the functions, rights and immunities accorded to consular officers and their offices, as well as the rights and obligations of “host States” (where the consul is established) and “sending States” (the State represented by the consul). Many state codes can be found online: e.B. California.

· Mark J. Kadish, Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: The International Court of Justice in Mexico v. .