A recent press conference held at the Afghanistan embassy in New Delhi has ignited a firestorm of debate, with opposition parties heavily criticizing the ruling BJP government for its stance on the exclusion of female journalists. The event, which followed bilateral talks between India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, saw women journalists allegedly denied entry.
Did India ‘allow’ the ban on women journalists?
In response to the growing outcry, the Ministry of External Affairs stated that the Indian government had no involvement in the press interaction organized by the Afghan foreign minister. The BJP, defending its position, emphasized that the press conference took place within the Afghanistan embassy premises, an area where the Indian government reportedly has no jurisdiction.
The controversy intensified with political figures weighing in. Congress MP Rahul Gandhi criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi, suggesting that allowing such exclusions sends a message to Indian women that they are not supported. He stated, “When you allow the exclusion of women journalists from a public forum, you are telling every woman in India that you are too weak to stand up for them.”
Media organizations, including the Editors Guild of India and the Indian Women Press Corps, have condemned the exclusion, arguing that diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention does not justify gender discrimination.
What does the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations say?
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) is the cornerstone treaty governing diplomatic interactions between states, including the operations of embassies and consulates. It is widely regarded as one of the most successful UN legal instruments.
Article 22 of the convention establishes the inviolability of mission premises, meaning that the host country cannot physically intervene within the embassy without the consent of the head of mission. This inviolability, however, does not imply that the sending state’s laws automatically apply within the embassy; rather, it means the host country cannot enforce its laws inside without permission.
Conversely, Article 41 of the same convention stipulates that all individuals enjoying diplomatic privileges and immunities have a duty to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state and must not interfere in its internal affairs.
Are embassies ‘foreign soil’?
A common misconception is that embassies are considered the territory of the sending state or ‘foreign soil’. This is incorrect. Embassy premises remain part of the host country’s territory. While technically subject to the host country’s laws, enforcement within these premises is restricted by diplomatic immunity, which can sometimes be perceived as a loophole to disregard the host country’s principles.
Related Articles
- Editors Guild of India on exclusion of women journalists at Afghan Taliban minister presser
- Pakistan blames Indian proxies, Afghanistan for terror attacks as Taliban’s Muttaqi meets Jaishankar
- Priyanka Chaturvedi’s old posts on Afghan Taliban resurface as women journalists barred from presser; Sena MP responds
- Understanding the Vienna Convention