The former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Javier González-Olaecheaspoke about the announced proposal of the Peruvian State to introduce changes in the Caracas Convention on Diplomatic Asylum.
As he referred to Peru21the convention registers some gaps to prevent further abuses in the granting of this diplomatic protection.
Foreign Minister Hugo de Zela has reported that he has initiated a round of consultations with his peers in the region to promote a change in the Caracas Convention so that the States that grant asylum carry out prior consultations and request information from the State of the asylum seeker. He has also specified that the Peruvian proposal will be presented in December before the Organization of American States (OAS). What is your opinion on this?
Zela’s foreign minister, ambassador, is very competent and knows these matters very well because he has been vice chancellor, a very senior official of the OAS and also a permanent representative before said organization. The beginning of consultations announced by him before his peers anticipates and demonstrates the political will not to delay serious treatment and respect for his peers in the region.
What should the Peruvian proposal be based on?
Article IX of the Caracas Convention prescribes that whoever grants asylum will take into account the information that the territorial State, that is, Peru, provides to regulate its criteria regarding the nature of the crimes or the existence of related common crimes and this, as I understand, has not occurred due to the express safe conduct that Mexico granted to Mrs. (Betssy) Chávez.
How long would this process take at the OAS? What is the procedure? How long could it take to get a response?
I believe that all deadlines should be specified taking into account all possible circumstances. This includes the asylum State and who can grant safe conduct in accordance with Articles II and the first paragraph of Article III, which introduces a variant. Deadlines are very important in this matter. 70 years after the Convention, it is necessary to fill gaps in the face of the obvious abuse of asylum.
Is the change, if approved, immediately applicable?
There are no deadlines, the procedure for introducing amendments is clear; Proposals are presented, negotiated, agreement is sought and approved in accordance with the previously established procedure and quorum
Is the decision binding on the Peruvian State?
Yes, it is binding and the date for entry into force is agreed upon in accordance with the constitutional norms that each country grants to the internal treatment of an international treaty.
Could Mexico eventually back down on Betssy Chávez’s asylum and give up?
Mexico, theoretically, can desist. Perhaps in a next government given that this asylum is ideologically colored.
Receive your Perú21 by email or WhatsApp. Subscribe to our enriched digital newspaper. Take advantage of the discounts here.
