8-Jan-2020: Home ministry issues revised guidelines for mutual legal assistance treaties
The Union Home Ministry has issued revised guidelines for mutual legal assistance in criminal matters with other nations as part of the government's policy of zero tolerance for crime and in an endeavour to fast track the dispensation of justice.
India has signed Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLAT) with 42 countries for cooperation in criminal matters and the home ministry is the designated 'central authority' for the country for it.
In furtherance to the government's policy of zero tolerance for crime and in an endeavour to fast track the dispensation of justice, the home ministry has taken steps to enhance and streamline the process of international mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. The revised guidelines for mutual legal assistance in criminal matters were issued by the home ministry in December 2019.
Under the MLAT, a country can request for obtaining evidence for criminal investigations and prosecutions. The evidence includes witness statements or the service of documents among others.
The revised guidelines provide step-by-step guidance to the investigation agencies for drafting and processing letters rogatory or mutual legal assistance requests and service of summons, notices and other judicial documents.
By incorporating various legal and technological developments in the recent years, it aims to make the documentation in this regard more precise and focused as well as compliant with international requirements.
The guidelines have also taken into account the concerns raised by various courts for prompt and timely responses in service of documents on persons residing abroad.
As an initiative, the revised guidelines have provision for service of documents on authorities of foreign country preferably within 10 days of receipt of request in respect of offences committed against women and children.
Training in mutual legal assistance in criminal matters has also been taken up for investigators, prosecutors and judicial officers.
The transnational nature of crime and digital explosion has blurred geographical boundaries for criminal activities. Availability of evidence and criminals outside the sovereign jurisdiction of countries has necessitated the transformation of scope and nature of conventional investigation.
India has entered into Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties and agreements with 42 countries and is signatory to various international conventions -- UNCAC, UNTOC etc.
Generally, assistance is sought and received in the form of mutual legal assistance requests or letters rogatory and service of summons, notices, judicial documents on persons residing abroad.
In order to streamline the process of rendering or seeking such assistance, the home ministry had issued guidelines regarding investigation abroad and issue of letters rogatory in 2007 and regarding service of summons, notices or judicial process on the persons residing abroad in 2009.
Over the decade, there have been substantial changes in international cooperation based on new legislations, regulations and conventions and amendment in procedural laws all over the world including India.
These changes necessitated the need for comprehensive review of existing guidelines to keep them abreast the modern era requirements.
20-Jan-2020: Iran to quit NPT if its nuclear programme gets referred to UN
Iran threatened to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) if European countries bring alleged violations of the historic nuclear deal with world powers to the United Nations Security Council.
The 190-member NPT, which was signed in 1968 and came into effect in 1970, bans signatories other than the United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France from acquiring nuclear weapons – in return for allowing them to pursue peaceful nuclear programmes for power generation, overseen by the UN.
NPT is the foundation of global nuclear arms control since the Cold War, including a 2015 deal that Iran signed with the world powers, which offered it access to global trade in return for accepting curbs to its atomic programme.
The Islamic Republic gradually stepped back from its obligations under the accord after US President Donald Trump quit the deal in 2018 and reimposed crushing sanctions that have severely harmed the Iranian economy.
Germany, France, and the UK accused Iran of violating the nuclear accord and launched a dispute mechanism last week, which could see the matter referred back to the Security Council and a reimposition of UN sanctions.
Tehran has repeatedly held talks with European officials to find ways to keep the nuclear agreement alive, but has blamed the Europeans for failing to guarantee economic benefits that Iran was meant to receive in return for curbing nuclear work.
Iran says it cannot negotiate with Trump, who broke promises by repudiating the deal reached under his predecessor Barack Obama.
29-Jan-2020: Trump’s Israel-Palestine peace plan
The West Asia peace plan unveiled by U.S. President Donald Trump seeks to give the Israelis what they have long wanted — an expansive state with Jerusalem as its “undivided capital” and tight security control over a future Palestinian state. With his plan, Mr. Trump is actually pushing to revive the stalled two-state talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians, but on his own terms. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had earlier spoken against the two-state solution, has accepted the Trump plan, while appearing beside the President in the White House. The Palestinians were absent.
The Trump plan seeks to address most of the contentious issues in the conflict such as the border of Israel, status of Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements on the West Bank, land swap between Israel and Palestine, Israel’s security concerns and the status of the city of Jerusalem. However, the solutions Mr. Trump has proposed to almost all of these issues favour the Israeli positions. For example, Israel would be allowed to annex the Jewish settlements on the West Bank as well as the Jordan Valley. The Palestinian refugees, who were forced out from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war that followed the declaration of the state of Israel in the historic Palestine, would not be allowed to return. They could move to the future Palestinian state, be integrated into the host countries or settled in other regional countries.
Jerusalem, perhaps the most contentious issue, would be “the undivided capital” of Israel, with Palestine gaining its capital in the east of the city — beyond the security border Israel has already built. In return, Israel would freeze further settlement activities on the West Bank for four years — the time for negotiations. During this period, the Palestinian Authority should dismiss its current complaints at the International Criminal Court against Israel and refrain itself from taking further actions. It should also crack down on “terrorist” groups such as Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. Mr. Trump has also proposed $50 billion in investment over 10 years should Palestine accept the proposals. In the final settlement, Palestine would get control over more land than what it currently controls (According to the Oslo Accords, the West Bank was divided into three areas and only one of them is under the direct control of the Palestinian Authority). The plan proposes some land swap for the Israeli annexation of the West Bank Jewish settlements. It seeks to enlarge Gaza and connect the strip with the West Bank through a tunnel. The Arab towns in the southeast of Israel, which are close to Gaza, could become part of a future Palestinian state.
The Palestine position, which is backed by most of the world powers, is the formation of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state based on the 1967 border (meaning the whole of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) with East Jerusalem as its capital (including the Old City that houses Haram esh-Sharif, also known as Temple Mount, a holy site for both Muslims and Jews). Issues like the right of return of the Palestinian refugees are to be settled in final negotiations. But Mr. Trump has effectively rejected the Palestinian claims outright and asked them to make more compromises. He seeks to give Jerusalem and about 30% of the West Bank to the Israelis and has denied the right of return of the Palestinian refugees — all for truncated sovereignty for the Palestinians in a state that would practically be surrounded by Israel. And for this, the Palestinians should take action against militant groups, stop supporting Palestinian families of those jailed or killed by Israel and refrain itself from questioning the occupation in international fora.
The Fatah party of President Mahmoud Abbas runs the Palestinian Authority on the West Bank, while Hamas is running Gaza. While there’s a bitter feud between these two, both sides, as well as the Islamic Jihad, have come together in rejecting the Trump plan. It would be difficult for any Palestinian leader to sell Mr. Trump’s proposals to a people who are living under occupation for decades. Unsurprisingly, they had rejected the proposal even before Mr. Trump unveiled it. The Palestinians say the Trump administration, which recognised the disputed Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and supported the annexation of the settlements on the West Bank, cannot be an impartial mediator for peace. The Trump plan seems to be underscoring this argument.