INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
CASE CONCERNING UNITED STATES
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF
IN TEHRAN
(UNITED STATESOF AMERICAv. IRAN)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF PROVISIONAL
MEASURES
ORDEROF 15 DECEMBER1979
COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFSET ORDONNANCES
AFFAIRE RELATIVE AU PERSONNEL
DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE
DES ÉTATS-UNIS A TÉHÉRAN
(ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE c. IRAN)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES
CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCEDU 1DÉCEMBRE1979 1979
15December
General List INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
No.64
YEAR 1979
15December 1V9
CASE CONCERNING UNITED STATES
DIPLOMATIC AND CBNSULAR STAFF
IN TEHRAN
(UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.IRAN)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF PROVISIONAL
MEASURES
ORDER
Present:President Sir Humphrey WALDOCK ; Vice-President ELI;S
Judges FORSTERG,ROS,LACHSM , OROZOV ,AGENDRA SINGH,
RUDA,MOSLERT ,ARAZIO,DA,AGO,EL-ERIANS,ETTE-CAMARA,
BAXTER;Registrar AQUARONE.
The International Court of Justice,
Composed as above,
After deliberation,
Having regard to Articles 41 andf the Statute of the Court,
Having regard to Articles 73 and 74 of the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Application by the United States of America filed
in theRegistry of the Court on 29November 1979,instituting proceedings
against the IslarnicRepublic of Iran inrespect of a dispute concerningthe
situation in the United States Embassy in Tehran and the seizure and
holding as hostages of members of the United States diplornatic and
consular staff in I;an
Makes thefollowing Ord:r
1. Whereas in the above-mentioned Application the United States
Government invokesjurisdictional provisionsin certain treaties as bases8 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
for the Court'sjurisdiction inthepresentcase ;whereas itfurther recounts
a sequence of events,beginning on 4 November 1979in and around the
United States Embassy in Tehran and involving the invasion of the
Embassy premises, the seizure of United States diplomatic and consular
staff and theircontinued detention ;and whereas, on thebasis of thefacts
there alleged, it requests the Court to adjudge and declare :
"(a) That the Government of Iran, in tolerating, encouraging, and
failing to prevent and punish the conduct described in the pre-
cedingStatement of Facts [in the Application], violated its inter-
national legal obligations to the United States as provided by
- Articles 22, 24, 25, 27, 29,31, 37 and 47 of the Vienna Con-
vention on Diplomatic Relations,
- Articles 28, 31,33,34,36 and 40 of theViennaConvention on
Consular Relations,
- Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Per-
sons, including Diplomatic Agents, and
- Articles II (4), XIII, XVIII and XIX of the Treaty of Arnity,
Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between theUnited
States and Iran, and
- Articles 2 (3), 2 (4) and 33 of the Charter of the United
Nations ;
(b) That pursuant to the foregoing international legal obligations,
the Government of Iran is under a particular obligation imme-
diately to secure the release of al1United States nationals cur-
rently being detained within the premises of the United States
Embassy in Tehran and to assure that al1such persons and al1
other United Statesnationals in Tehran are allowed to leaveIran
safely ;
(c) That theGovernment of Iran shallpay to theUnited States,in its
own right and in the exerciseof its right of diplomaticprotection
of its nationals, reparation for the foregoingviolations of Iran's
international legalobligations to theUnited States, in asum to be
determined by the Court ;and
(d) That theGovernment of Iran submit toits competentauthorities
for the purpose of prosecution those persons responsiblefor the
crimes committed against the premises and staff of the United
States Embassy and against the premises of its Consulates" ;
2. Having regard to therequest dated 29November 1979and filedinthe
Registry the same day, whereby the Government of the United States of9 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
America, relying on Article 41 of the Statute and Articles 73,74 and 75 of
the Rules of Court, asks the Court urgently to indicate, pending the final
decision in thecasebrought before it by the above-mentioned Application
of the same date, the following provisional measures :
''(a) That the Govemment of Iran immediately release al1hostages of
United States nationality and facilitate the prompt and safe
departure from Iran of these persons and al1other United States
officials in dignified and humane circumstances.
(b) That the Govemment of Iran immediatelyclear the premises of
the United States Embassy, Chancery and Consulate of al1per-
sons whose presence is not authorized by the United States
Chargé d'Affairesin Iran, and restore the premises to United
States control.
(c) That the Government of Iran ensure that al1persons attached to
the United States Embassy and Consulate should be accorded,
and protected in,fullfreedomwithin the Embassy and Chancery
premises, and thefreedom of movement witlzinIran necessary to
carry out their diplomatic and consular functions.
(d) That the Govemment of Iran not place on trial any person
attached to the Embassy and Consulate of the United Statesand
refrain from any action to implement any such trial.
(e) That theGovernment of Iran ensure that no action istaken which
might prejudice the rights of the United Statesin respect of the
carrying out of any decision which the Court may render on the
merits, and in particular neither take nor permit action that
would threaten the lives, safety, or well-being of the hos-
tages" ;
3. Whereas, on the day on which the Application and request for indi-
cation of provisionalmeasures were receivedin the Registry,the Govern-
ment of Iran was notified by telegram of thefiling of the Application and
request, and of the particular measures requested, and copies of both
documents weretransmitted by expressairmail to theMinister for Foreign
Affairs of Iran ;
4. Whereas, pursuant to Article 40, paragraph 3, of the Statute and
Article 42 of the Rules of Court, copies of the Application were transmit-
ted to Members of the United Nations and to other States entitled to
appear before the Court ;
5. Whereas on 6 December 1979the Registrar addressed the notifica-
tion provided for in Article 63 of the Statute of the Court to the States,
other than the parties to the case, which were listed in the relevant
documents of the United Nations Secretariat as parties to the following
conventions, invoked in the Application : 10 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAEF (ORDER 15XII 79)
(i) the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961,and the
accompanying Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory
Settlement of Disputes ;
(ii) the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963, and the
accompanying Optional Protocolconcerningthe Compulsory Set-
tlement of Disputes ;
(iü) the Convention on the Prevention and Punishrnent of Crimes
against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic
Agents, of 1973 ;
6. Whereas on 30November 1979,pending the meeting of the Court,
the President, in exercise of the power conferred on him by Article 74,
paragraph 4,of the Rulesof Court,addresseda telegramto eachof thetwo
Governments concerned calling attention to the fact that the matter was
now subjudice before the Court and to the need to act in such a way as
would enable any Order the Court might make in thepresent proceedings
to have its appropriate effects ; and whereas by those telegrams the two
governments were,inaddition,informed that theCourt wouldhold public
hearings at an earlydateat whichthey rnightpresent their observations on
the requestfor provisional measures, and that theprojected date for such
hearingswas 10December 1979,thisdate beinglater confirmed byfurther
telegrams of 3 December 1979 ;
7. Whereas, in preparation for the hearings, the President put certain
preliminary questions to the Agent of the United StatesGovernment by a
telegram of 4 December 1979,a copy of which was communicated on the
same date to the Government of Iran ; whereas, in response to those
questionsthe United States Agent on 7 December 1979submitted to the
Court a declaration by Mr. David D. Newsom, Under-Secretary of State
for Political Affairs, together with certain documents appended thereto ;
and whereas copies of that letter and the declaration and documents
accompanying it were immediately transmitted to the Government of
Iran ;
8. Whereas on 9 December 1979a letter, dated the sameday and trans-
mitted by telegram, wasreceivedfrom the Minister for ForeignAffairs of
Iran, which reads as follows :
[Translationfrom French]
1have thehonour to acknowledgereceipt of the telegramsconcern-
ing the meeting of the International Court of Justiceon 10December
1979, at the request of the Government of the United States of
America, and to submitto you below theposition of theGovernment
of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this respect.
1. First of all, the Govemment of the Islamic Republic of Iran
wishesto expressitsrespect fortheInternational Court ofJustice,and
for itsdistinguished members,forwhat theyhaveachievedin thequest
for just and equitable solutions to legal conflicts between States.11 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
However, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran considers
that the Court cannot and should not take cognizance of the case
which theGovernment of theUnited States ofAmerica has submitted
toit, and ina most significantfashion,acaseconfined towhatis called
the question of the "hostages of the American Embassy in Teh-
ran".
2. For this question only represents a marginal and secondary
aspect of an overall problem, one such that it cannot be studied
separately, and which involves, interalia,more than 25 years of con-
tinual interference by the United Statesin theinterna1affairs of Iran,
the shameless exploitation of Ourcountry, and numerous crimes per-
petrated againstthe Iranian people, contrary to and inconflict with al1
international and humanitarian norms.
3. The problem involved in the conflict between Iran and the
United States is thus not one of theinterpretation and the application
of the treaties upon which the American Application is based, but
resultsfrom an overall situation containing much more fundamental
and more complexelements.Consequently,the Courtcannot examine
the American Application divorced from its proper context, namely
the whole political dossier of the relations between Iran and the
United States overthelast 25years.Thisdossierincludes, interalia,al1
the crimes perpetrated in Iran by the American Govemment, in par-
ticular thecoupd'étatof 1953stirred up andcarried out by theCIA,the
overthrow of the lawful national government of Dr. Mossadegh, the
restoration of the Shahand of his régimewhich wasunder the control
of American interests, and al1 the social, economic, cultural, and
political consequences of the direct interventions in Our intemal
affairs, as well as grave, flagrant and continuous violations of al1
international norms, comrnitted by the United States in Iran.
4. With regard to the request for provisional measures, as formu-
latedby theUnited States, it infact implies that theCourt should have
passedjudgment on the actual substance of the case submitted to it,
which the Courtcannot do without breach of the normsgoverningits
jurisdiction. Furthermore, since provisional measures are by defini-
tionintended to protect theinterests oftheparties,theycannot be uni-
lateral, as they are in the request submitted by the American Gov-
ernment.
In conclusion, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran
respectfullydraws the attention of the Court to the deep-rootedness
and the essentialcharacter of the Islarnic revolution of Iran, a revo-
lution of a whole oppressed nation against its oppressors and their
masters ;any examination of the numerousrepercussions thereof is a
matter essentially and directly within the national sovereignty of
Iran ;
9. Whereas both the Government of the United States of America and12 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
the Government of Iran have been afforded an opportunity of presenting
their observations on the request for the indication of provisional mea-
sures ;
10. Whereas at thepublichearing held on 10December 1979there were
present in Court the Agent, counsel and adviser of the United States of
America :
11. ~ivin~ heard the oral observations on the request for provisional
measures on behalf of the United States of America presented by the
Honorable Roberts B. Owen, Agent, and the Honorable Benjamin R.
Civiletti,Attorney-General of the United States, as counsel, and taking
note of the repliesgivenon behalf of that Government tofurther questions
put at the conclusion of the hearingby the President of the Court and by
two Members of the Court ;
12. Having taken note that thefinalsubmissions of theUnited States of
Americafiled in the Registry on 12December 1979,following thehearing
of 10December 1979,wereto the effectthat theGovernment of theUnited
Statesrequests that theCourt,pending finaljudgment inthis case,indicate
forthwith the following measures :
"First, that the Government of Iran immediately release al1hos-
tages of United Statesnationality and facilitate the prompt and safe
departure from Iran of these persons and al1other United States
officialsin dignified and humane circumstances.
Second, that the Government of Iran immediately clear the
premises of the United States Embassy, Chancery and Consulate in
Tehran of al1persons whosepresence is not authorized by the United
States Chargéd'Affaires in Iran, and restore the premises to United
States control.
Third, that the Government of Iran ensure that, to the extent that
the United States should choose, and Iran should agree, to the con-
tinuedpresence ofUnited Statesdiplomatic and consularpersonnelin
Iran, all persons attached to the United States Embassy and Consu-
lates should be accorded,andprotected in,fullfreedom of movement,
as well as the privileges and immunities to which they are entitled,
necessary to cary out their diplomatic and consular functions.
Fourth, that the Government of Iran not place on trial any person
attached to the Embassy and Consulates of the United States and
refrain from any action to implement any such trial ; and that the
Government of Iran not detain or permit the detention of any such
person in connection with any proceedings,whether of an 'interna-
tional commission' or otherwise, and that any such person not be
required to participate in any such proceeding.
Fifth, that the Government of Iran ensure that no action is taken
which might prejudice the rights of the United States in respect of
carrying out of any decision which the Court may render on the13 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
merits, and, in particular neither take, nor permit, action that would
threaten the lives, safety, or well-being of the hostages" ;
13. Noting that the Government of Iran was not represented at the
hearing ;and whereas the non-appearance of one of the States concerned
cannot by itself constitute an obstacle to the indication of provisional
measures ;
14. Whereas the treaty provisions on which, in its Application and oral
observations,the United StatesGovernment claims to found thejurisdic-
tion of the Court to entertain the present case are the following :
(i) the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961,and Arti-
cle1 of its accompanying Optional Protocol concerning the Com-
pulsory Settlement of Disputes ;
(ii) the Vienna Convention on ConsularRelations of 1963,and Article 1
of its accompanying Optional Protocol concerningthe Compulsory
Settlement of Disputes ;
jiii) Article XXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Rela-
tions, and Consular Rights of 1955between the United States of
Amenca and Iran ; and
(iv) Article 13,paragraph 1,oftheConvention of 1973on thePrevention
and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Per-
sons, including Diplomatic Agents ;
15. Whereas on therequest for provisionalmeasuresin thepresent case
the Court ought to indicate suchmeasures onlyif theprovisions invokedby
the Applicant appear,prirna facie, to afford a basis on which thejurisdic-
tion of the Court might be founded ;
16. Whereas,so far asconcernsthe rights claimed by theUnited States
of America with regard to thepersonnel and premises of its Embassy and
Consulatesin Iran, Article 1ofeachof the twoProtocols whichaccompany
theViennaConventions of 1961and 1963on, respectively,Diplomaticand
Consular Relations provides expressly that :
"Disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the
Convention shall lie within the compulsoryjurisdiction of the Inter-
national Court of Justice and may accordingly be brought before the
Court by an application made by any party to the dispute being a
Party to the present Protocol" ;
whereas the United Nations publication Multilateral Treatiesin respectof
whichthe Secretary-GeneralPerforms Depositaiy Functionslists both Iran 14 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
and the United Statesasparties to each of the two Conventions,asalso to
each of their Protocolsconcerningthe compulsorysettlement of disputes,
and in al1cases without any reservation to the instrument in question ;
17. Whereas, while it is true that Articles II and III of the above-
mentioned Protocols provide for the possibility for the parties to agree,
under certainconditions, to resortnot to the InternationalCourt ofJustice
but to an arbitral tribunal or to a conciliation procedure, no such agree-
ment wasreached by theparties ;and whereas the terms ofArticle 1of the
Optional Protocols provide in the clearest manner for the compulsory
jurisdiction of the InternationalCourt of Justicein respect of any dispute
arising out of the interpretation or application of the above-mentioned
Vienna Conventions ;
18. Whereas, accordingly, itismanifest fromtheinformation beforethe
Court and from the terms of Article 1of each of the two Protocolsthat the
provisions of theseArticles fumish abasis on which thejurisdiction of the
Court might be founded with regard to the claims of the United States
under the Vienna Conventions cf 1961and 1963 ;
19. Whereas, so far asconcernsthe rights claimed by the United States
with regard to two of its nationals who, according to the declaration by
Mr. David D. Newsom referred to inparagraph 7 above, arenot personnel
either of its diplomatic or of its consular mission, it appears from the
statements of the United States Government that these two private indi-
viduals were seizedandare detainedas hostages withinthe premises of the
United States Embassyor Consulate inTehran ;whereasitfollowsthat the
seizure and detention of these individualsalso fa11within the scope of the
applicableprovisions of the Vienna Conventions of 1961and 1963relating
to theinviolability of the premises of Embassies and Consulates ;whereas,
furthermore, the seizureand detention of these individualsin the circum-
stances allegedby theUnited States clearlyfail alsowithinthescope of the
provisions of Article 5 of the Vienna Convention of 1963expressly pro-
vidingthat consularfunctionsincludethefunctions ofprotecting,assisting
and safeguardingthe interests of nationals ; and whereas the purpose of
these functions is precisely to enable the sending State, through its con-
sulates, to ensure that its nationals are accordedthe treatment dueto them
under the general rules of international lawas alienswithinthe territory of
the foreign State ;
20. Whereas, accordingly, it is likewise manifest that Article 1 of the
Protocolsconcerningthecompulsorysettlement of disputes which accom-
pany the Vienna Conventions of 1961and 1963furnishesabasis on which
thejurisdiction of the Court might be founded with regard to the claims of
the United States in respect of the two private individuals in question ;
21. Whereas, therefore,the Court does not find it necessary for present
purposes to enter into the question whether a basis for the exercise of its15 *DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
powers under Article 41 of the Statute might also be found under Arti-
cleXXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and
Consular Rights of 1955,and Article 13,paragraph 1,of the Convention
on the Prevention and Punishrnent of Crimesagainst Intemationally Pro-
tected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, of 1973.
22. Whereas, on the other hand, in the above-mentioned letter of
9 December 1979theGovemment of Iran maintains that theCourt cannot
and should not take cognizance of thepresent case,for thereason that the
question of the hostages forms only "a marginal and secondaryaspect of
an overall problem" involving the activities of the United States in Iran
over aperiod of more than 25years ;and whereasit further maintains that
any examination of the numerous repercussions of the Islamicrevolution
of Iran isessentially and directly a matter within thenational sovereignty
of Iran ;
23. Whereas, however important, and however connected with the
present case,the iniquities attributed to the United StatesGovernment by
the Government of Iran in that letter may appear to be to the latter
Government,the seizureoftheUnited States Embassy andConsulatesand
the detention of internationally protected persons as hostages cannot, in
the view of the Court, be regarded as something "secondary" or "mar-
ginal", havingregard to the importance of the legal principles involved ;
whereas the Court notes in this regard that the Secretary-General of the
United Nations has indeed referred to these occurrences as "a grave
situation" posing "a seriousthreat tointernational peace and security" and
that the SecurityCouncilin resolution 457(1979)expresseditself asdeeply
concemed at the dangerous levelof tension between the two States,which
could have grave consequences for international peace and security ;
24. Whereas, moreover, if the Iranian Govemment considers the al-
leged activities of the United States in Iran legally to have a close con-
nection with the subject-matter of the United States Application, it
remains open to that Govemment under the Court's Statute and Rules to
present its own arguments to the Court regarding those activitieseither by
way of defencein a Counter-Memorial or by way of a counter-claim filed
under Article 80 of the Rules of Court ; whereas, therefore, by not
appearing in the present proceedings,the Gsvemment of Iran, by its own
choice, deprives itself of the opportunity of developing its own arguments
before the Court and of itself filinga request for the indication of provi-
sional measures ; and whereas no provision of the Statute or Rules con-
templates that theCourt shoulddecline to takecognizance of oneaspect of
a dispute merely because that dispute has other aspects, however impor-
tant ;
25. Whereas it is no doubt true that the Islamicrevolution of Iran is a 16 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
matter "essentially and directlywithin the national sovereignty of Iran" ;
whereas however a dispute which concerns diplomatic and consular pre-
misesand thedetention of internationally protected persons,and involves
the interpretationor application of multilateralconventionscodifyingthe
international law governing diplomatic and consular relations, is one
which by its very nature falls within international jurisdiction ;
26. Whereas accordingly the two considerationsadvanced by the Gov-
ernment of Iran in its letter of 9 December 1979cannot, in the viewof the
Court, be accepted as constituting any obstacle to the Court's taking
cognizance of the case brought before it by the United StatesApplication
of 29 November 1979 ;
27. Whereas in that sameletter of 9 December 1979the Government of
Iran alsoputs fonvard twoconsiderations on thebasis ofwhichit contends
that the Court ought not, in any event, to accede to the United States
request for provisional measures in the present case ;
28. Whereas, in the first place, it maintains that the request for provi-
sional measures,asformulated by the United States, "in fact implies that
the Court should havepassedjudgment on the actualsubstance of the case
subrnitted to it" ;whereas it is true that in the Factoryat Chorzbwcasethe
Permanent Court of International Justice declined to indicate interim
measures of protection on the ground that the request in that case was
"designed to obtain an interimjudgment in favour of a part of the claim"
(Orderof21 November 1927,P.C.I.J., SeriesA, No. 12,at p. 10) ; whereas,
however, thecircumstances of that case wereentirelydifferentfrom those
of thepresent one,and therequesttheresought toobtain from the Court a
finaljudgment on part of a claimfor a sum of money ;whereas,moreover,
a request for provisional measures must by its very nature relate to the
substance of the case since, as Article 41 expressly States,their object is to
preserve the respectiverights of either party ; and whereas in the present
casethe purpose of theUnited Statesrequestappears to be not toobtain a
judgment, interim or final, on the merits of its claims but to preserve the
substance of the rights which it claimspendente lite ;
29. Whereas, in the second place, the Government of Iran takes the
position that "since provisional measures are by definition intended to
protect the interests of the parties they cannot be unilateral" ;whereas,
however,thehypothesis onwhich thisproposition isbased does notaccord
with the terms of Article 41 of the Statute which refer explicitly to "any
provisional measures which ought to be taken to preserve the respective
rights of either party" ; whereas the whole concept of an indication of
provisional measures, as Article 73 of the Rules recognizes, implies a17 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
request from one of the parties for measures to preserve its own rights
against action by the other party calculated to prejudice those rights
pendente lite ;whereas it follows that a request for provisional measures is
by its nature unilateral ;and whereas the Govemment of Iran has not
appeared beforetheCourt in order to requesttheindication ofprovisional
measures ;whereas, however, theCourt, as it has recognized in Article 75
of its Rules, must at al1times be alert to protect the nghts of both the
parties in proceedings beforeit and, in indicating provisional measures,
has not infrequently done so with reference to both the parties ;and
whereas this does not, and cannot, mean that the Court is precludedfrom
entertaining a request from a party merely by reason of the fact that
measures which it requests are unilateral ;
30. Whereas, accordingly, neither of the considerations put fonvard in
the Iranian Government's letter of 9 December 1979can be regarded as
constituting grounds whch should lead the Court to decline to entertain
the United States request in the present case ;
31. Whereas it follows that the Court has not found in the Irarian
Government's letter of 9 December 1979legalgrounds whch should lead
it to conclude that it ought not to entertain the United States request ;
32. Whereas the Court will accordingly now proceed to examine the
request of the United StatesGovernment for theindication of provisional
measures in the present case ;
33. Whereas by the terms of Article 41 of the Statute the Court may
indicate such measures only when it considers that circumstances so
require in order to preserve the rights of either party ;
34. Whereas the circumstances alleged by the United States Govern-
ment which, in the submission of that Government,require theindication
of provisional measures in the present case may be summarized as fol-
lows :
(i) On 4 November 1979,in the course of a demonstration outside the
United States Ernbassycompound inTehran, demonstratorsattacked
the Embassypremises ;no Iranian security forcesintervened or were
sent to relieve the situation, despite repeated calls for help from the
Embassy to the Iranian authorities. Ultimately the whole of the
Embassy prernises was invaded. The Embassy personnel, including
consular and non-Amencan staff,andvisitors whowerepresentinthe
Embassy at the time wereseized.Shortly aftenvards, according to the
United StatesGovernment,itsconsulatesin Tabriz and Shiraz,which18 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
had been attacked earlier in 1979,werealso seized,without any action
being taken to prevent it.
(ii)Sincethat time, the premises of the United States Embassy in Tehran,
and of the consulates in Tabriz and Shiraz, have remained in the
hands of thepersons who seizedthem. These persons have ransacked
the archives and documentsboth of the diplomatic mission and of its
consular section. The Embassy personnel and other persons seizedat
the time of the attack havebeen held hostage with theexception of 13
persons released on 18 and 20 November 1979.Those holding the
hostages have refused to release them, save on condition of the ful-
filment by the United States of various demands regarded by it as
unacceptable. The hostages arestatedto have frequently been bound,
blindfolded, and subjected to severe discomfort, complete isolation
and threats that they would be put on trial or even put to death. The
United States Government affirms that it has reason to believe that
some of them may have been transferred to other places of confine-
ment.
(iii) The Government of the United States considers that not merely has
the Iranian Governmentfailed to prevent theeventsdescribed above,
but alsothat there is clear evidence of its complicityin, and approval
of, those events.
(iv) The persons held hostage in the premises of the United States Em-
bassy inTehran include,according to theinformationfurnished to the
Court by theAgent of theUnited States, at least 28persons having the
status,duly recognized by theGovernment of Iran, of "member of the
diplomatic staff" within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations of 1961 ;at least 20 persons having the status,
similarly recognized, of "member of the administrative and technical
staff" withinthemeaning of that Convention ; and two otherpersons
of United Statesnationality not possessing either diplomatic or con-
sular status. Of the persons with the status of member of the diplo-
matic staff, four are members of the Consular Section of the Em-
bassy.
(v) In addition to thepersons held hostage in the premises of the Tehran
Embassy, the United StatesChargé d'Affaires in Iran and two other
United States diplomatic agents are detained in the premises of
the Irànian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, incircumstances which the
Government of the United Stateshas not been able to make entirely
clear, but which apparently involve restriction of their freedom of
movement, and a threat to their inviolabilityas diplomats ;
35. Whereas on the basis of the above circumstances alleged by the
United States Government it claims in the Application that the Govern-
ment of Iran hasviolatedand isviolatinganumber of the legalobligations
imposed upon it by the Vienna Convention on Diplornatic Relations of19 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
1961,the Vienna Convention on ConsularRelations of 1963,theTreaty of
Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the
United States of 1955,the Convention on the Preventionand Punishment
of CrimesagainstInternationally ProtectedPersons,includingDiplomatic
Agents, of 1973,the Charter of the United Nations, and customaryinter-
national law ;
36. Whereas the power of the Court to indicate provisional measures
under Article 41of the Statute of theCourt hasas its object to preservethe
respective rights of the parties pending the decision of the Court, and
presupposes that irreparable prejudice should not be caused to rights
which are the subject of dispute injudicial proceedings ;
37. Whereas the rights which the United States of America subrnits as
entitled to protection by the indication of provisional measures were
specified in the request of 29 November 1979as :
"the rights of its nationals to life,liberty,protection and security ;the
rights of inviolability,irnmunity and protection for itsdiplomaticand
consular officiais;and therights of inviolability and protection for its
diplomatic and consular premises" ;
and at the hearing of 10December 1979as :
"the right [of the United States] to maintain a working and effective
embassy in Tehran, the right to have its diplomatic and consular
personnel protected in their lives and persons from every form of
interference and abuse, and the right to have its nationals protected
and secure" ;
and whereas the measuresrequestedby the United States for the protec-
tion of these rights are as set out in paragraphs 2 and 12 above ;
38. Whereas there is no morefundamental prerequisite for the conduct
of relations between States than theinviolability of diplomatic envoysand
embassies, so that throughout history nations of al1creeds and cultures
have observed reciprocal obligations for that purpose ; and whereas the
obligations thus assumed,notably those for assuring the persona1safetyof
diplomats and their freedomfromprosecution, are essential,unqualified,
and inherent in their representative character and their diplomatic func-
tion ;
39. Whereas the institution of diplomacy, with its concomitant privi-
legesand immunities,has withstoodthe test of centuriesand proved tobe
an instrument essential for effective co-operation in the international
community, and for enablingStates,irrespective of their differing consti-
tutional and social systems, to achieve mutual understanding and to
resolve their differences by peaceful means ;
40. Whereas the unimpeded conduct of consular relations, which have
also been established between peoples since ancient times, is no less20 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
important in the context of present-day international law, in promoting
the development of friendly relations among nations, and ensuring pro-
tection and assistance for aliens residentin the territories of other States ;
and whereas therefore the privileges and immunities of consular officers
and consular employees, and the inviolability of consular premises and
archives, are similarly principles deep-rooted in international law ;
41. Whereas, while no State is under any obligation to maintain dip-
lomatic or consular relations with another, yet it cannot fail to recognize
the imperative obligations inherent therein, now codified in the Vienna
Conventions of 1961and 1963,to which both Iran and the United States
are parties ;
42. Whereas continuance of the situation the subject of the present
request exposes the human beings concerned to privation, hardship,
anguish and evendanger to lifeand health and thus to a seriouspossibility
of irreparable harm ;
43. Whereas in connection with the present request the Court cannot
fail to take note of theprovisions of theConvention on thePreventionand
Punishment of Crimes against Intemationally Protected Persons,includ-
ing Diplomatic Agents, of 1973,to which both Iran and the United States
are parties ;
44. Whereasin thelight of the severalconsiderations set out above, the
Court finds that the circumstancesrequire it to indicate provisional mea-
sures, as provided by Article 41 of the Statute of the Court, in order to
preserve the rights claimed ;
45. Whereas the decision given in the present proceedings in no way
prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with the
merits of the case or any questionsrelating to the merits themselves, and
leavesunaffectedthe right of theGovernment of Iranto submitarguments
against suchjurisdiction or in respect of such merits ;
46. Whereas the Court will therefore now proceed to indicate the mea-
sures which it considers are required in the present case ;
47. Accordingly,
unanimously,
1. Indicates, pending its final decision in the proceedingsinstituted on
29November 1979by the United States of America against the Islamic
Republic of Iran, the following provisional measures : 21 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
A. (i) The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran should immedi-
ately ensure that the prernisesof the United States Embassy, Chancery
and Consulates be restored to the possession of the United States
authorities under their exclusive control, and should ensure their
inviolabilityand effectiveprotection asprovided for by the treatiesin
force between the two States, and by general international law ;
(ii) The Govemment of theIslamicRepublic of Iran should ensure the
immediate release, without any exception, of al1persons of United
States nationality who are or have been held in the Embassy of the
United States of America or in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in
Tehran, or have been held as hostages elsewhere, and afford full pro-
tection to al1such persons, in accordance with the treaties in force
between the two States, and with general international law ;
(iii) The Govemment of the IslamicRepublic of Iran should,as from
that moment,afford to al1thediplomatic and consularpersonnel of the
United States the full protection, privileges and immunities to which
they are entitledunder thetreaties in forcebetween the two States,and
under generalinternational law,includingimmunityfrom anyform of
criminaljurisdiction andfreedom and facilitiesto leavethe territory of
Iran ;
B. TheGovernment of theUnited States ofAmerica and the Govemment
of the IslamicRepublic of Iran shouldnot take any action and should
ensure that no action istaken which mayaggravatethetension between
the two countries or render the existing dispute more difficult of
solution ;
2. Decidesthat, until theCourt deliversits finaljudgment in thepresent
case, it will keep the matters covered by this Order continuously under
review.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at
the PeacePalace,The Hague, ths fifteenthday ofDecember, one thousand
nine hundred and seventy-nine,infour copies, ofwhich onewillbe placed
in the archives at the Court,and the others transmitted respectively to the
Govemment of the Islarnic Republic of Iran, to the Government of the
United States of America, and to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations for transmission to the Security Council.
(Signed) Humphrey WALDOCK,
President.
(Signed) S. AQUARONE,
Registrar.
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
CASE CONCERNING UNITED STATES
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF
IN TEHRAN
(UNITED STATESOF AMERICAv. IRAN)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF PROVISIONAL
MEASURES
ORDEROF 15 DECEMBER1979
COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFSET ORDONNANCES
AFFAIRE RELATIVE AU PERSONNEL
DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE
DES ÉTATS-UNIS A TÉHÉRAN
(ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE c. IRAN)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES
CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCEDU 1DÉCEMBRE1979 1979
15December
General List INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
No.64
YEAR 1979
15December 1V9
CASE CONCERNING UNITED STATES
DIPLOMATIC AND CBNSULAR STAFF
IN TEHRAN
(UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.IRAN)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF PROVISIONAL
MEASURES
ORDER
Present:President Sir Humphrey WALDOCK ; Vice-President ELI;S
Judges FORSTERG,ROS,LACHSM , OROZOV ,AGENDRA SINGH,
RUDA,MOSLERT ,ARAZIO,DA,AGO,EL-ERIANS,ETTE-CAMARA,
BAXTER;Registrar AQUARONE.
The International Court of Justice,
Composed as above,
After deliberation,
Having regard to Articles 41 andf the Statute of the Court,
Having regard to Articles 73 and 74 of the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Application by the United States of America filed
in theRegistry of the Court on 29November 1979,instituting proceedings
against the IslarnicRepublic of Iran inrespect of a dispute concerningthe
situation in the United States Embassy in Tehran and the seizure and
holding as hostages of members of the United States diplornatic and
consular staff in I;an
Makes thefollowing Ord:r
1. Whereas in the above-mentioned Application the United States
Government invokesjurisdictional provisionsin certain treaties as bases 1979
15décembre
COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE Rôlno64néral
15 décembre1979
AFFAIRE RELATIVE AU PERSONNEL
DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE
DES ÉTATS-UNIS A TÉHÉRAN
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES
CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCE
Présents:Sir Humphrey WALDOCKP , résiden;M. ELIAS,Vice-Prési-
dent; MM. FORSTERG , ROS,LACHS,MOROZOVN , AGENDRA
SINGHR , UDAM, OSLERT,ARAZIO, DA,AGO,EL-ERIAN, 'SETTE-
CAMARA B,AXTERj,ges; M. AQUARONE G,reffier.
La Cour internationale de Justice,
Ainsi composée,
Après délibéréen chambre du conseil,
Vu les articles 41 et 48 du Statut de la Cour,
Vu les articles 73 et 74 du Règlementde la Cour,
Vula requêteenregistréeauGreffel29novembre 1979,par laquelleles
Etats-Unis d'Amériqueont introduit une instance contre la République
islamique d'Iran au sujet d'un différend concernant la situation
bassade des Etats-Unis Téhéran ainsiquela prise en otageset la déten-
tion de membres du personnel diplomatique et consulairedes Etats-Unis
en Iran;
Rend l'ordonnancesuivant:
1. Considérant que dans la requête susmentionnéele Gouvernement
des Etats-Unis invoque les clauses juridictionnelles de certains traités8 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
for the Court'sjurisdiction inthepresentcase ;whereas itfurther recounts
a sequence of events,beginning on 4 November 1979in and around the
United States Embassy in Tehran and involving the invasion of the
Embassy premises, the seizure of United States diplomatic and consular
staff and theircontinued detention ;and whereas, on thebasis of thefacts
there alleged, it requests the Court to adjudge and declare :
"(a) That the Government of Iran, in tolerating, encouraging, and
failing to prevent and punish the conduct described in the pre-
cedingStatement of Facts [in the Application], violated its inter-
national legal obligations to the United States as provided by
- Articles 22, 24, 25, 27, 29,31, 37 and 47 of the Vienna Con-
vention on Diplomatic Relations,
- Articles 28, 31,33,34,36 and 40 of theViennaConvention on
Consular Relations,
- Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Per-
sons, including Diplomatic Agents, and
- Articles II (4), XIII, XVIII and XIX of the Treaty of Arnity,
Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between theUnited
States and Iran, and
- Articles 2 (3), 2 (4) and 33 of the Charter of the United
Nations ;
(b) That pursuant to the foregoing international legal obligations,
the Government of Iran is under a particular obligation imme-
diately to secure the release of al1United States nationals cur-
rently being detained within the premises of the United States
Embassy in Tehran and to assure that al1such persons and al1
other United Statesnationals in Tehran are allowed to leaveIran
safely ;
(c) That theGovernment of Iran shallpay to theUnited States,in its
own right and in the exerciseof its right of diplomaticprotection
of its nationals, reparation for the foregoingviolations of Iran's
international legalobligations to theUnited States, in asum to be
determined by the Court ;and
(d) That theGovernment of Iran submit toits competentauthorities
for the purpose of prosecution those persons responsiblefor the
crimes committed against the premises and staff of the United
States Embassy and against the premises of its Consulates" ;
2. Having regard to therequest dated 29November 1979and filedinthe
Registry the same day, whereby the Government of the United States of comme bases de la compétencede la Cour en l'espèce ;qu'il relate toute
une séried'événementscommençant le 4 novembre 1979 à l'intérieuret
aux alentours de l'ambassade des Etats-Unis à Téhéranet comportant
l'invasion deslocaux de l'ambassade, lacapturede membres du personnel
diplomatique et consulaire des Etats-Unis et leurmaintienen détention ;
et que, se fondant sur les faits ainsi allégués,il prie la Cour de dire et
juger :
(a) que,entolérant,enencourageant etens'abstenant depréveniretde
réprimerle comportement décritdans l'exposé desfaits [figurant
dans la requête],leGouvernement de l'Iran a violé sesobligations
juridiques internationales à l'égard desEtats-Unis telles qu'elles
résultent
- des articles 22, 24,25, 27, 29, 31,37 et 47 de la conventionde
Vienne sur les relations diplomatiques,
- des articles 28, 31,33, 34,36 et 40 de la convention de Vienne
sur les relations consulaires,
- des articles 4 et 7 de la convention sur la prévention et la
répressiondesinfractionscontre lespersonnesjouissant d'une
protection internationale, y compris les agents diplomati-
ques,
- des articles II, paragraphe 4, XIII, XVIII et XIX du traité
d'amitié,de commerceet de droits consulairesconclu entre les
Etats-Unis et l'Iran,
- desarticles 2,paragraphes3 et4,et 33de laCharte desNations
Unies ;
b) que, conformément aux obligations juridiques internationales
mentionnées ci-dessus, le Gouvernement de l'Iran a l'obligation
formelle d'assurerlalibérationimmédiatede tous lesressortissants
des Etats-Unis qui sont actuellement détenus dans le bâtiment de
l'ambassade des Etats-Unis à Téhéranet de faire en sorte que
toutes ces personnes et les autres ressortissants des Etats-Unis en
Iran soient autorisés à quitter l'Iran en sécurité ;
c) que le Gouvernement de l'Iran doitréparation aux Etats-Unis,sur
la base de leur droit propre et dans l'exercice de leur droit de
protection diplomatique à l'égarddeleursressortissants, en raison
des violationssusmentionnéespar l'Iran de ses obligationsjuridi-
ques internationales envers les Etats-Unis,le montant devant être
déterminé par la Cour ;
d) que le Gouvernement de l'Iran remette aux autoritéscompétentes
iraniennes aux fins de poursuites les personnes responsables des
infractions commises contre le bâtiment et le personnel de l'am-
bassade des Etats-Unis et contre le bâtiment des consulats des
Etats-Unis ));
2. Vu la demandedu 29 novembre 1979enregistréeau Greffe le même
jour, par laquellele GouvernementdesEtats-Unisd'Amérique,invoquant9 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
America, relying on Article 41 of the Statute and Articles 73,74 and 75 of
the Rules of Court, asks the Court urgently to indicate, pending the final
decision in thecasebrought before it by the above-mentioned Application
of the same date, the following provisional measures :
''(a) That the Govemment of Iran immediately release al1hostages of
United States nationality and facilitate the prompt and safe
departure from Iran of these persons and al1other United States
officials in dignified and humane circumstances.
(b) That the Govemment of Iran immediatelyclear the premises of
the United States Embassy, Chancery and Consulate of al1per-
sons whose presence is not authorized by the United States
Chargé d'Affairesin Iran, and restore the premises to United
States control.
(c) That the Government of Iran ensure that al1persons attached to
the United States Embassy and Consulate should be accorded,
and protected in,fullfreedomwithin the Embassy and Chancery
premises, and thefreedom of movement witlzinIran necessary to
carry out their diplomatic and consular functions.
(d) That the Govemment of Iran not place on trial any person
attached to the Embassy and Consulate of the United Statesand
refrain from any action to implement any such trial.
(e) That theGovernment of Iran ensure that no action istaken which
might prejudice the rights of the United Statesin respect of the
carrying out of any decision which the Court may render on the
merits, and in particular neither take nor permit action that
would threaten the lives, safety, or well-being of the hos-
tages" ;
3. Whereas, on the day on which the Application and request for indi-
cation of provisionalmeasures were receivedin the Registry,the Govern-
ment of Iran was notified by telegram of thefiling of the Application and
request, and of the particular measures requested, and copies of both
documents weretransmitted by expressairmail to theMinister for Foreign
Affairs of Iran ;
4. Whereas, pursuant to Article 40, paragraph 3, of the Statute and
Article 42 of the Rules of Court, copies of the Application were transmit-
ted to Members of the United Nations and to other States entitled to
appear before the Court ;
5. Whereas on 6 December 1979the Registrar addressed the notifica-
tion provided for in Article 63 of the Statute of the Court to the States,
other than the parties to the case, which were listed in the relevant
documents of the United Nations Secretariat as parties to the following
conventions, invoked in the Application : PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD.15 XII 79) 9
l'article41 du Statut et les articles 73,74 et 75 du Règlement,priela Cour
d'indiquer d'urgence,en attendant l'arrêtdéfinitifen l'affairedont la Cour
a étésaisie par la requête datée dumême jour, les mesures conservatoires
suivantes, tendant à ce que :
<<) le Gouvernementdel'Iran libèreimmédiatementtous les otages
ressortissantsdesEtats-Unis et aide cespersonnes ainsiquetous
autres fonctionnaires ressortissants des Etats-Unis à quitter
l'Iran rapidement et en sécurité dansdes conditions dignes et
humaines ;
b) leGouvernementdel'Iran expulseimmédiatementdesbâtiments
del'ambassade, de la chancellerie et du consulat des Etats-Unis
toutes les personnes dont la présencen'est pas autoriséepar le
chargéd'affaires des Etats-Unis en Iran et remette lesbâtiments
sous l'autoritédes Etats-Unis ;
c) leGouvernement de l'Iran fasseen sortequetoutes lespersonnes
attachéesa l'ambassade et au consulatdes Etats-Unis se voient
accorder, aveclaprotection voulue, touteliberté à l'intérieurdes
bâtiments de l'ambassade et de la chancellerie ainsiquelaliberté
de mouvement à l'intérieurde l'Iran quileur est nécessairepour
s'acquitter de leurs fonctions diplomatiqueset consulaires ;
d) le Gouvernement de l'Iran ne traduise en justice aucune des
personnes attachées à l'ambassadeet au consulat des Etats-Unis
et s'abstienne de toute action tendant à entamer un tel pro-
cès;
e) le Gouvernement de l'Iran fasse en sorte qu'aucune mesure ne
soitprisequi puisseporteratteinte aux droits desEtats-Unispour
ce qui est de l'application de toute décisionquela Courpourrait
rendre sur le fond et en particulier qu'il ne prenne ni n'autorise
aucuneactionmettant en dangerla vie,lasécuritéoulebien-être
des otages );
3. Considérant que, le jour où la requête introductive d'instance et la
demande en indication de mesures conservatoires sont parvenues au
Greffe,leGouvernementdel'Iran aétéavisépar télégramme deleur dépôt,
ainsi que des mesures sollicitées,et que copie des deux documents a été
expédiée par courrieraérien exprès au ministre des affaires étrangèresde
l'Iran;
4. Considérantque,conformément àl'article40,paragraphe 3, du Sta-
tut età l'article42 du Règlement, des copies de la requêteont ététrans-
mises au Secrétairegénéralde l'organisation des Nations Unies, aux
Membres des Nations Unies et aux autres Etats admis à ester devant la
Cour ;
5. Considérant que le 6décembre1979le Greffier a adressé la notifi-
cation prévue à l'article63 du Statut aux Etats, autres que les parties en
litige, énuméréd sans les documentspertinents du Secrétariat de l'Orga-
nisationdesNations Uniescomme étantparties auxconventions suivantes
citéesdans la requête : 10 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAEF (ORDER 15XII 79)
(i) the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961,and the
accompanying Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory
Settlement of Disputes ;
(ii) the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963, and the
accompanying Optional Protocolconcerningthe Compulsory Set-
tlement of Disputes ;
(iü) the Convention on the Prevention and Punishrnent of Crimes
against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic
Agents, of 1973 ;
6. Whereas on 30November 1979,pending the meeting of the Court,
the President, in exercise of the power conferred on him by Article 74,
paragraph 4,of the Rulesof Court,addresseda telegramto eachof thetwo
Governments concerned calling attention to the fact that the matter was
now subjudice before the Court and to the need to act in such a way as
would enable any Order the Court might make in thepresent proceedings
to have its appropriate effects ; and whereas by those telegrams the two
governments were,inaddition,informed that theCourt wouldhold public
hearings at an earlydateat whichthey rnightpresent their observations on
the requestfor provisional measures, and that theprojected date for such
hearingswas 10December 1979,thisdate beinglater confirmed byfurther
telegrams of 3 December 1979 ;
7. Whereas, in preparation for the hearings, the President put certain
preliminary questions to the Agent of the United StatesGovernment by a
telegram of 4 December 1979,a copy of which was communicated on the
same date to the Government of Iran ; whereas, in response to those
questionsthe United States Agent on 7 December 1979submitted to the
Court a declaration by Mr. David D. Newsom, Under-Secretary of State
for Political Affairs, together with certain documents appended thereto ;
and whereas copies of that letter and the declaration and documents
accompanying it were immediately transmitted to the Government of
Iran ;
8. Whereas on 9 December 1979a letter, dated the sameday and trans-
mitted by telegram, wasreceivedfrom the Minister for ForeignAffairs of
Iran, which reads as follows :
[Translationfrom French]
1have thehonour to acknowledgereceipt of the telegramsconcern-
ing the meeting of the International Court of Justiceon 10December
1979, at the request of the Government of the United States of
America, and to submitto you below theposition of theGovernment
of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this respect.
1. First of all, the Govemment of the Islamic Republic of Iran
wishesto expressitsrespect fortheInternational Court ofJustice,and
for itsdistinguished members,forwhat theyhaveachievedin thequest
for just and equitable solutions to legal conflicts between States. PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (oRD.15XII 79)
10
i) la convention de Vienne de 1961sur les relations diplomatiques et le
protocole de signaturefacultativeconcernant le règlementobligatoire
des différends qui s'yrattache ;
ii) la convention de Vienne de 1963 sur les relations consulaires et le
protocole de signaturefacultativeconcernant le règlementobligatoire
des différends qui s'yrattache ;
iii) la convention de 1973surla préventionetla répressiondesinfractions
contre les personnesjouissant d'une protection internationale, ycom-
pris les agents diplomatiques ;
6. Considérantque le 30novembre 1979,en attendant la réunion dela
Cour et dans l'exercice du pouvoir qui lui est conférépar l'article 74,
paragraphe 4, du Règlement, le Président a adressé à chacun des deux
gouvernementsconcernésun télégrammeoùilappelait leurattention surle
faitquel'affaireétait désormaispendante devantlaCouret surla nécessité
d'agir de manière que toute ordonnance de la Cour sur la demande en
indication de mesures conservatoires puisse avoir les effets voulus ; et
considérant que,par lemêmetélégrammel,esdeux gouvernements ont été
en outre informés que la Cour tiendrait audience à une date rapprochée
afin qu'ils puissent présenter leurs observations sur la demande en indi-
cation de mesures conservatoires ; et que la date projetée pour cette
audience était celle du 10décembre1979,ultérieurement confirméepar
télégrammedu 3 décembre 1979 ;
7. Considérant que, dans le cadre de la préparation de l'audience, le
Président aposécertainesquestionspréliminaires à l'agent du Gouverne-
ment desEtats-Unis par télégramme du 4 décembre1979,dont copieaété
communiquée le mêmejour au Gouvernement de l'Iran ; considérant
qu'enréponse à ces questions l'agent desEtats-Unis a soumis à la Courle
7 décembre1979unedéclarationdeM. David D. Newsom,sous-secrétaire
d'Etat pour les affaires politiques, déclaration qui était accompagnéede
lu sieursdocuments annexés :et considérantaue co~iede la lettre. de la
déclaration et des piècesjointes a été immédiatement transmise au Gou-
vernement de l'Iran ;
8. Considérant que le 9 décembre 1979 a été reçuedu ministre des
affairesétrangèresd'Iran une lettre datée du même jour et transmise par
télégramme,dont le texte suit :
J'ai l'honneur d'accuser réceptiondes télégrammesconcernant la
réunion,le10décembre1979,dela Courinternationale de Justice,sur
requête du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amérique,et de vous
soumettre ci-dessous la position du Gouvernement de la République
islamique de l'Iran àcet égard.
1. Tout d'abord, le Gouvernement de la République islamiquede
l'Iran tient exprimerle respect qu'ilvoue à la Courinternationale de
Justice età ses distinguésmembres pour l'Œuvrepar eux accomplie
dans la recherche de solutionsjustes et équitables aux conflits juri-11 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
However, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran considers
that the Court cannot and should not take cognizance of the case
which theGovernment of theUnited States ofAmerica has submitted
toit, and ina most significantfashion,acaseconfined towhatis called
the question of the "hostages of the American Embassy in Teh-
ran".
2. For this question only represents a marginal and secondary
aspect of an overall problem, one such that it cannot be studied
separately, and which involves, interalia,more than 25 years of con-
tinual interference by the United Statesin theinterna1affairs of Iran,
the shameless exploitation of Ourcountry, and numerous crimes per-
petrated againstthe Iranian people, contrary to and inconflict with al1
international and humanitarian norms.
3. The problem involved in the conflict between Iran and the
United States is thus not one of theinterpretation and the application
of the treaties upon which the American Application is based, but
resultsfrom an overall situation containing much more fundamental
and more complexelements.Consequently,the Courtcannot examine
the American Application divorced from its proper context, namely
the whole political dossier of the relations between Iran and the
United States overthelast 25years.Thisdossierincludes, interalia,al1
the crimes perpetrated in Iran by the American Govemment, in par-
ticular thecoupd'étatof 1953stirred up andcarried out by theCIA,the
overthrow of the lawful national government of Dr. Mossadegh, the
restoration of the Shahand of his régimewhich wasunder the control
of American interests, and al1 the social, economic, cultural, and
political consequences of the direct interventions in Our intemal
affairs, as well as grave, flagrant and continuous violations of al1
international norms, comrnitted by the United States in Iran.
4. With regard to the request for provisional measures, as formu-
latedby theUnited States, it infact implies that theCourt should have
passedjudgment on the actual substance of the case submitted to it,
which the Courtcannot do without breach of the normsgoverningits
jurisdiction. Furthermore, since provisional measures are by defini-
tionintended to protect theinterests oftheparties,theycannot be uni-
lateral, as they are in the request submitted by the American Gov-
ernment.
In conclusion, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran
respectfullydraws the attention of the Court to the deep-rootedness
and the essentialcharacter of the Islarnic revolution of Iran, a revo-
lution of a whole oppressed nation against its oppressors and their
masters ;any examination of the numerousrepercussions thereof is a
matter essentially and directly within the national sovereignty of
Iran ;
9. Whereas both the Government of the United States of America and PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15XII 79) 11
diques entre Etats. Cependant, le Gouvernement de la République
islamique de l'Iran estime que la Cour ne peut et ne doit se saisir de
l'affaire qui lui est soumise par le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis
d'Amérique,et de façon fort révélatrice, limitée à la soi-disant ques-
tion des (<otages de l'ambassade américaine à Téhéran D.
2. Cettequestionen effet ne représentequ'un élémenm t arginalet
secondaire d'un problèmed'ensembledont ellene sauraitêtre étudiée
séparémentet qui englobe entre autresplus de vingt-cinq ans d'ingé-
rences continuellespar les Etats-Unis dans les affaires intérieuresde
l'Iran, l'exploitation éhontéede notre pays et de multiples crimes
perpétrés contrele peupleiranien, envers et contre toutes les normes
internationales et humanitaires.
3. Le problème en cause dans le conflit existant entre l'Iran et les
Etats-Unis ne tient donc pas del'interprétationet de l'application des
traitéssur lesquels se base la requêteaméricaine,mais découled'une
situationd'ensemblecomprenantdes éléments beaucoupplus fonda-
mentaux etplus complexes.En conséquence,laCour nepeut examiner
la requête américaineen dehors de son vrai contexte à savoir l'en-
semble du dossier politique des relationsentrel'Iran et les Etats-Unis
au cours de ces vingt-cinq dernières années. Ce dossier comprend
entre autres tous les crimes perpétrés enIran par le Gourvernement
américain,enparticulierle coup d'Etat de 1953fomentéetexécuti:par
la CIA, l'évictiondu gouvernement national légitime du docteur
Mossadegh, la remise en place du Chah et de son régime asserviaux
intérêtsaméricains ettoutes les conséquencessociales,économiques,
culturelles et politiques des interventions directes dans nos affaires
intérieures,ainsique des violations graves, flagrantes et perpétuelles
de toutes les normes internationalesperpétréespar les Etats-Unis en
Iran.
4. En ce qui concernela demande de mesures conservatoires, telle
que formuléepar les Etats-Unis, elleimpliqueen fait que la Courait
jugé de la substance mêmede l'affaire qui lui est soumise, ce que
celle-ci ne saurait faire sans violer les normes qui régissent sa com-
pétence.D'autrepart, les mesures conservatoires ktant par définition
destinées à protégerles intérêtsdes parties en cause, elles ne pour-
raient avoir le caractère unilatéral de la requête présentée parle
Gouvernement américain.
En conclusion, le Gouvernement de la République islamique de
l'Iran attire respectueusement l'attention de la Cour sur les racines
profondes et l'essence mêmede la révolution islamique de l'Iran,
révolution de toute une nation opprimée contre les oppresseurs et
leurs maîtres, et dont l'examen des multiples répercussions relève
essentiellement et directement de la souveraineté nationale de
l'Iran;
9. Considérant que la possibilitéa été donnéetant au Gouvernement12 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
the Government of Iran have been afforded an opportunity of presenting
their observations on the request for the indication of provisional mea-
sures ;
10. Whereas at thepublichearing held on 10December 1979there were
present in Court the Agent, counsel and adviser of the United States of
America :
11. ~ivin~ heard the oral observations on the request for provisional
measures on behalf of the United States of America presented by the
Honorable Roberts B. Owen, Agent, and the Honorable Benjamin R.
Civiletti,Attorney-General of the United States, as counsel, and taking
note of the repliesgivenon behalf of that Government tofurther questions
put at the conclusion of the hearingby the President of the Court and by
two Members of the Court ;
12. Having taken note that thefinalsubmissions of theUnited States of
Americafiled in the Registry on 12December 1979,following thehearing
of 10December 1979,wereto the effectthat theGovernment of theUnited
Statesrequests that theCourt,pending finaljudgment inthis case,indicate
forthwith the following measures :
"First, that the Government of Iran immediately release al1hos-
tages of United Statesnationality and facilitate the prompt and safe
departure from Iran of these persons and al1other United States
officialsin dignified and humane circumstances.
Second, that the Government of Iran immediately clear the
premises of the United States Embassy, Chancery and Consulate in
Tehran of al1persons whosepresence is not authorized by the United
States Chargéd'Affaires in Iran, and restore the premises to United
States control.
Third, that the Government of Iran ensure that, to the extent that
the United States should choose, and Iran should agree, to the con-
tinuedpresence ofUnited Statesdiplomatic and consularpersonnelin
Iran, all persons attached to the United States Embassy and Consu-
lates should be accorded,andprotected in,fullfreedom of movement,
as well as the privileges and immunities to which they are entitled,
necessary to cary out their diplomatic and consular functions.
Fourth, that the Government of Iran not place on trial any person
attached to the Embassy and Consulates of the United States and
refrain from any action to implement any such trial ; and that the
Government of Iran not detain or permit the detention of any such
person in connection with any proceedings,whether of an 'interna-
tional commission' or otherwise, and that any such person not be
required to participate in any such proceeding.
Fifth, that the Government of Iran ensure that no action is taken
which might prejudice the rights of the United States in respect of
carrying out of any decision which the Court may render on the PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD .5XII 79) 12
des Etats-Unis d'Amérique qu'au Gouvernement de l'Iran de présenter
leurs observations sur la demande en indication de mesures conserva-
toires ;
10. Considérantqu'à l'audiencepublique qui s'esttenue le 10décembre
1979étaientprésentsdevant la Cour l'agent, lesconseilsetun conseillerdu
Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amérique ;
11. Ayant entendu lesobservations orales sur la demande en indication
de mesuresconservatoiresprésentéesaunom du Gouvernement des Etats-
Unis d'Amériquepar l'honorable Roberts B. Owen, agent, et l'honorable
Benjamin R. Civiletti, Attorney-Generaldes Etats-Unis, conseil, et ayant
pris note des réponsesdonnéesau nom de ce gouvernement à d'autres
questions posées a l'issuede l'audience par le Présidentdela Cour et par
deux membres de la Cour ;
12. Ayant notéque, dans sesconclusions finales enregistréesau Greffe
le 12décembre 1979 a la suite de l'audience du 10décembre 1979, le
Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amérique priela Cour, en attendant
l'arrêt définitifen l'affaire, d'indiquer immédiatement des mesures
conçues comme suit :
Premièrement, que le Gouvernement de l'Iran libère immédia-
tement tous les otages ressortissants des Etats-Unis et aide ces per-
sonnes ainsi que tous autres fonctionnaires ressortissants des Etats-
Unis à quitter l'Iran rapidement et en sécuritédans des conditions
dignes el humaines. -
Deuxièmement, que le Gouvernement de l'Iran expulse immédia-
tement des bâtiments del'ambassade, dela chancellerieet du consulat
des Etats-Unis à Téhérantoutes les personnes dont la présencen'est
pas autoriséepar lechargéd'affaires desEtats-Unis en Iran et remette
les bâtiments sous l'autoritédes Etats-Unis.
Troisièmement, que le Gouvernement de l'Iran fasse en sorte que,
pour autant que les Etats-Unis souhaiteraient - et que l'Iran accep-
terait-lemaintien du personnel diplomatique et consulairedesEtats-
Unis en Iran, toutes les personnes attachées à l'ambassade et aux
consulats desEtats-Unisse voient accorder,avecla protection voulue,
l'entièrelibertéde mouvement, ainsi que les privilèges et immunités
auxquels elles ont droit, qui leur sont nécessairespour s'acquitter de
leurs fonctions diplomatiques et consulaires.
Quatrièmement, que le Gouvernement de l'Iran ne traduise en
justice aucune despersonnes attachées à l'ambassade etaux consulats
des Etats-Unis et s'abstienne de toute actiontendant àentamer un tel
procès ; et que le Gouvernement de l'Iran nemaintienne en détention
ni n'autorise la détention d'aucune de ces personnes en vue d'une
procédure devant une instance quelconque, ((commission internatio-
nale ))ou autre, et qu'aucune d'ellesne soit contrainte de participer à
une telle procédure.
Cinquièmement, que le Gouvernement de l'Iran fasse en sorte
qu'aucune mesurene soitprise quipuisseporter atteinteauxdroits des
Etats-Unis pour ce qui est de l'application de toute décisionque la13 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
merits, and, in particular neither take, nor permit, action that would
threaten the lives, safety, or well-being of the hostages" ;
13. Noting that the Government of Iran was not represented at the
hearing ;and whereas the non-appearance of one of the States concerned
cannot by itself constitute an obstacle to the indication of provisional
measures ;
14. Whereas the treaty provisions on which, in its Application and oral
observations,the United StatesGovernment claims to found thejurisdic-
tion of the Court to entertain the present case are the following :
(i) the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961,and Arti-
cle1 of its accompanying Optional Protocol concerning the Com-
pulsory Settlement of Disputes ;
(ii) the Vienna Convention on ConsularRelations of 1963,and Article 1
of its accompanying Optional Protocol concerningthe Compulsory
Settlement of Disputes ;
jiii) Article XXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Rela-
tions, and Consular Rights of 1955between the United States of
Amenca and Iran ; and
(iv) Article 13,paragraph 1,oftheConvention of 1973on thePrevention
and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Per-
sons, including Diplomatic Agents ;
15. Whereas on therequest for provisionalmeasuresin thepresent case
the Court ought to indicate suchmeasures onlyif theprovisions invokedby
the Applicant appear,prirna facie, to afford a basis on which thejurisdic-
tion of the Court might be founded ;
16. Whereas,so far asconcernsthe rights claimed by theUnited States
of America with regard to thepersonnel and premises of its Embassy and
Consulatesin Iran, Article 1ofeachof the twoProtocols whichaccompany
theViennaConventions of 1961and 1963on, respectively,Diplomaticand
Consular Relations provides expressly that :
"Disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the
Convention shall lie within the compulsoryjurisdiction of the Inter-
national Court of Justice and may accordingly be brought before the
Court by an application made by any party to the dispute being a
Party to the present Protocol" ;
whereas the United Nations publication Multilateral Treatiesin respectof
whichthe Secretary-GeneralPerforms Depositaiy Functionslists both Iran PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15XII 79) 13
Cour pourrait rendre sur le fond et en particulier qu'il ne prenne ni
n'autorise aucune action mettant en danger la vie, la sécurité oule
bien-être desotages ;
13. Constatant que le Gouvernement de l'Iran ne s'estpas fait repré-
senter à l'audienceetconsidérantquelanon-comparutiondel'un desEtats
en cause ne saurait en soiconstituer un obstacle àl'indication de mesures
conservatoires ;
14. Considérant que les dispositions conventionnelles sur lesquellesle
Gouvernement des Etats-Unis, dans sa requêteintroductived'instance et
ses observations orales, prétend fonder la compétence de la Cour pour
connaître de la présente affaire sont les suivantes :
i) la convention de Vienne de 1961 sur les relations diplomatiques et
l'article 1 du protocole de signature facultative concernant le règle-
ment obligatoiredes différendsqui s'yrattache ;
ii) la convention de Vienne de 1963sur les relations consulaires et l'ar-
ticle 1du protocole de signature facultative concernant le règlement
obligatoiredes différends qui s'yrattache ;
iii) l'article XXI, paragraphe 2, du traité d'amitié,de commerce et de
droits consulaires de 1955 entre les Etats-Unis d'Amérique et
l'Iran ;
iv) l'article 13,paragraphe 1,de laconvention de 1973surlapréventionet
la répressiondes infractionscontre lespersonnes jouissant d'une pro-
tection internationale, y compris les agents diplomatiques ;
15. Considérant que, dans l'examen de la demande en indication de
mesures conservatoires en la présenteaffaire,la Cour ne doit indiquer de
telles mesures que si les dispositions invoquéespar le demandeur se pré-
sentent commeconstituantprima facie unebasesurlaquelle la compétence
de la Cour pourrait être fondée ;
16. Considérant que, quant aux droits invoqués par les Etats-Unis
d'Amériqueencequiconcerne lepersonnel etleslocaux deleurambassade
et de leurs consulats en Iran, l'article 1 de chacun des deux protocoles
accompagnant respectivement les conventions de Vienne de 1961et 1963
sur les relations diplomatiques et les relations consulaires stipule expres-
sément :
(Les différends relatifs à l'interprétation ou à l'application de la
Convention relèvent de la compétenceobligatoire de la Cour inter-
nationale deJustice,qui, à cetitre,pourraêtresaisiepar une requêtede
toute partie au différendqui sera elle-mêmePartie au présent Proto-
cole ));
considérant que la publication des Nations Unies intitulée Traitésmulti-
latérauxpourlesquelsleSecrétairegénérae lxercelesfonctionsdedépositaire 14 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
and the United Statesasparties to each of the two Conventions,asalso to
each of their Protocolsconcerningthe compulsorysettlement of disputes,
and in al1cases without any reservation to the instrument in question ;
17. Whereas, while it is true that Articles II and III of the above-
mentioned Protocols provide for the possibility for the parties to agree,
under certainconditions, to resortnot to the InternationalCourt ofJustice
but to an arbitral tribunal or to a conciliation procedure, no such agree-
ment wasreached by theparties ;and whereas the terms ofArticle 1of the
Optional Protocols provide in the clearest manner for the compulsory
jurisdiction of the InternationalCourt of Justicein respect of any dispute
arising out of the interpretation or application of the above-mentioned
Vienna Conventions ;
18. Whereas, accordingly, itismanifest fromtheinformation beforethe
Court and from the terms of Article 1of each of the two Protocolsthat the
provisions of theseArticles fumish abasis on which thejurisdiction of the
Court might be founded with regard to the claims of the United States
under the Vienna Conventions cf 1961and 1963 ;
19. Whereas, so far asconcernsthe rights claimed by the United States
with regard to two of its nationals who, according to the declaration by
Mr. David D. Newsom referred to inparagraph 7 above, arenot personnel
either of its diplomatic or of its consular mission, it appears from the
statements of the United States Government that these two private indi-
viduals were seizedandare detainedas hostages withinthe premises of the
United States Embassyor Consulate inTehran ;whereasitfollowsthat the
seizure and detention of these individualsalso fa11within the scope of the
applicableprovisions of the Vienna Conventions of 1961and 1963relating
to theinviolability of the premises of Embassies and Consulates ;whereas,
furthermore, the seizureand detention of these individualsin the circum-
stances allegedby theUnited States clearlyfail alsowithinthescope of the
provisions of Article 5 of the Vienna Convention of 1963expressly pro-
vidingthat consularfunctionsincludethefunctions ofprotecting,assisting
and safeguardingthe interests of nationals ; and whereas the purpose of
these functions is precisely to enable the sending State, through its con-
sulates, to ensure that its nationals are accordedthe treatment dueto them
under the general rules of international lawas alienswithinthe territory of
the foreign State ;
20. Whereas, accordingly, it is likewise manifest that Article 1 of the
Protocolsconcerningthecompulsorysettlement of disputes which accom-
pany the Vienna Conventions of 1961and 1963furnishesabasis on which
thejurisdiction of the Court might be founded with regard to the claims of
the United States in respect of the two private individuals in question ;
21. Whereas, therefore,the Court does not find it necessary for present
purposes to enter into the question whether a basis for the exercise of its PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15 XII 79) 14
citel'Iran etlesEtats-Unis commeparties à chacunedes deuxconventions,
ainsi qu'a chacun des protocolescorrespondants concernant le règlement
obligatoire des différends,dans chaque cas sans aucune réservequant à
l'instmment dont il s'agit ;
17. Considérant que, s'ilest vrai que les articles II et III des protocoles
susmentionnésprévoientque les parties peuvent convenir d'adopter dans
certainesconditions,au lieudu recours àla Courinternationale de Justice,
une procédure devant un tribunal arbitral ou une procédurede concilia-
tion, aucun accord de ce genren'a étéconclu entre les parties ;et que les
termes de l'article 1 des protocoles de signature facultative ne sauraient
établirplusclairementlacompétenceobligatoiredelaCourinternationale
de Justice pour tout différend relatifà l'interprétation ou à l'application
des conventions de Vienne susmentionnées ;
18. Considérantpar conséquentqu'ilressortmanifestementdes rensei-
gnementssoumis à la Cour et des termes del'article 1de chacun des deux
protocoles que les dispositions de cet article fournissent une base sur
laquellela compétencedela Courpour connaîtredesdemandesprésentées
par les Etats-Unis en vertu des conventions de Vienne de 1961 et 1963
pourrait êtrefondée ;
19. Considérant que,quant auxdroits invoquéspar lesEtats-Unis en ce
qui concerne deux de leurs ressortissants qui, selon la déclaration de
M. David D. Newsom mentionnée au paragraphe 7 ci-dessus, ne font
partie ni du personnel de leur mission diplomatique ni de celui de leur
mission consulaire,ilressortdesdéclarations du GouvernementdesEtats-
Unis que ces deux personnes privéesont étéprises en otages et sont
détenues dans les locaux de l'ambassade ou consulat des Etats-Unis à
Téhéran ;considérantquedans cesconditions la capture etla détention de
ces personnes entrent aussi dans lecadre des dispositionsapplicablesdes
conventionsde Vienne de 1961et 1963relatives à l'inviolabilitédeslocaux
desambassadeset desconsulats ;considérantenoutre quela capture et la
détentionde ces personnes dans les circonstances alléguées par les Etats-
Unis entrent tout aussi clairement dans le cadre des dispositions de l'ar-
ticle 5de laconvention deViennede 1963quiprévoitexpressémentqueles
fonctions consulaires comprennent l'assistance aux ressortissants, leur
protection et la sauvegardede leursintérêts ;et considérantque ces fonc-
tions visent précisément à permettre à l'Etat d'envoi de veiller, par l'in-
termédiairedesesconsulats, àceque sesressortissants sevoient accorder le
traitement auquel ils ont droit, en vertu des règles généralesdu droit
international, comme étrangerssur le territoire de 1'Etatd'accueil ;
20. Considérant,par suite, qu'il estnon moins manifeste que l'article 1
des protocoles concernant le règlement obligatoire des différends qui se
rattachent aux conventions de Vienne de 1961 et 1963constitue une base
sur laquelle la compétence de la Cour pour connaître des demandes des
Etats-Unis au sujet des deux personnes privées enquestion pourrait être
fondée ;
21. Considérant, dès lors, que la Cour n'estime pas nécessaire aux
présentesfinsde traiter la questionde savoir sil'exercicedespouvoirsque15 *DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
powers under Article 41 of the Statute might also be found under Arti-
cleXXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and
Consular Rights of 1955,and Article 13,paragraph 1,of the Convention
on the Prevention and Punishrnent of Crimesagainst Intemationally Pro-
tected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, of 1973.
22. Whereas, on the other hand, in the above-mentioned letter of
9 December 1979theGovemment of Iran maintains that theCourt cannot
and should not take cognizance of thepresent case,for thereason that the
question of the hostages forms only "a marginal and secondaryaspect of
an overall problem" involving the activities of the United States in Iran
over aperiod of more than 25years ;and whereasit further maintains that
any examination of the numerous repercussions of the Islamicrevolution
of Iran isessentially and directly a matter within thenational sovereignty
of Iran ;
23. Whereas, however important, and however connected with the
present case,the iniquities attributed to the United StatesGovernment by
the Government of Iran in that letter may appear to be to the latter
Government,the seizureoftheUnited States Embassy andConsulatesand
the detention of internationally protected persons as hostages cannot, in
the view of the Court, be regarded as something "secondary" or "mar-
ginal", havingregard to the importance of the legal principles involved ;
whereas the Court notes in this regard that the Secretary-General of the
United Nations has indeed referred to these occurrences as "a grave
situation" posing "a seriousthreat tointernational peace and security" and
that the SecurityCouncilin resolution 457(1979)expresseditself asdeeply
concemed at the dangerous levelof tension between the two States,which
could have grave consequences for international peace and security ;
24. Whereas, moreover, if the Iranian Govemment considers the al-
leged activities of the United States in Iran legally to have a close con-
nection with the subject-matter of the United States Application, it
remains open to that Govemment under the Court's Statute and Rules to
present its own arguments to the Court regarding those activitieseither by
way of defencein a Counter-Memorial or by way of a counter-claim filed
under Article 80 of the Rules of Court ; whereas, therefore, by not
appearing in the present proceedings,the Gsvemment of Iran, by its own
choice, deprives itself of the opportunity of developing its own arguments
before the Court and of itself filinga request for the indication of provi-
sional measures ; and whereas no provision of the Statute or Rules con-
templates that theCourt shoulddecline to takecognizance of oneaspect of
a dispute merely because that dispute has other aspects, however impor-
tant ;
25. Whereas it is no doubt true that the Islamicrevolution of Iran is a PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15 XII 79) 15
lui confère l'article 41 du Statut pourrait égalementêtre fondé surI'ar-
ticleXXI, paragraphe 2, du traité d'amitié,de commerce et de droits
consulairesde 1955et sur l'article 13,paragraphe 1,de la convention de
1973surla préventionetla répressiondesinfractionscontre lespersonnes
jouissant d'une protection internationale, y compris les agents diploma-
tiques.
22. Considérant par ailleurs que, dans la lettre susmentionnée du
9 décembre1979,le Gouvernement de l'Iran soutientque la Cour ne peut
et nedoit sesaisirde laprésenteaffaire,au motif quelaquestiondes otages
ne représenterait ((qu'un élémenm t arginal et secondaire d'un problème
d'ensemble )concernant lesactivitésdesEtats-Unis enIran depuis plus de
vingt-cinqans ;et qu'il affirme au surplusque tout examen des multiples
répercussionsde larévolutionislamique del'Iran relèveessentiellementet
directement de la souveraineténationale de l'Iran ;
23. Considérant que, quelqueimportance et quelque lien avec la pré-
senteaffaireque les iniquitésattribuéesau GouvernementdesEtats-Unis
danscettelettre par le Gouvernement de l'Iran puissent sembleravoiraux
yeux de ce dernier, l'invasion de l'ambassade et des consulats des Etats-
Unis et la prise en otages de personnes internationalement protégées ne
sauraient, selonlaCour,en raison del'importance desprincipesjuridiques
en cause, êtreconsidérées commeayant un caractère <(secondaire >)ou
marginal )); rappelant, à cet égard,quele Secrétairegénéralde l'Orga-
nisation des Nations Unies a effectivement vu dans ces événements une
(situation grave ))constituant ((une menace grave contre la paix et la
sécuritéinternationales >)et que,dans sa résolution457(1979),le Conseil
de sécurité s'estdéclaréprofondémentpréoccupépar le niveau dangereux
de la tension entre les deux Etats, qui pourrait avoir des conséquences
graves pour la paix et la sécuritéinternationales ;
24. Considérant de surcroît que, si le Gouvernement de l'Iran estime
que les activités alléguéesdeE stats-Unisen Iran sont enétroiteconnexité
juridique avec l'objet de la requêtedes Etats-Unis, il lui est loisible, en
vertu du Statut et du Règlement de la Cour, de développer à ce sujet sa
propre argumentationdevant la Cour,soit comme moyen de défensedans
un contre-mémoire, soit par la voie d'une demande reconventionnelle
présentéeenvertu de l'article 80du Règlement ;et quepar conséquent, en
ne comparaissant pas danslaprésenteinstance, leGouvernement del'Iran
s'estde plein gréprivéde la possibilitéde faire valoir ses propres thèses
devant la Cour et de présenterlui-mêmeune demande en indication de
mesures conservatoires ;et qu'aucune disposition du Statut ou du Règle-
ment n'envisage que la Cour ne doive pas se saisir d'un aspect d'un
différend pour la simple raison que ce différend comporterait d'autres
aspects, si importants soient-ils ;
25. Considérant qu'il n'estcertes pas douteux que la révolutionisla- 16 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
matter "essentially and directlywithin the national sovereignty of Iran" ;
whereas however a dispute which concerns diplomatic and consular pre-
misesand thedetention of internationally protected persons,and involves
the interpretationor application of multilateralconventionscodifyingthe
international law governing diplomatic and consular relations, is one
which by its very nature falls within international jurisdiction ;
26. Whereas accordingly the two considerationsadvanced by the Gov-
ernment of Iran in its letter of 9 December 1979cannot, in the viewof the
Court, be accepted as constituting any obstacle to the Court's taking
cognizance of the case brought before it by the United StatesApplication
of 29 November 1979 ;
27. Whereas in that sameletter of 9 December 1979the Government of
Iran alsoputs fonvard twoconsiderations on thebasis ofwhichit contends
that the Court ought not, in any event, to accede to the United States
request for provisional measures in the present case ;
28. Whereas, in the first place, it maintains that the request for provi-
sional measures,asformulated by the United States, "in fact implies that
the Court should havepassedjudgment on the actualsubstance of the case
subrnitted to it" ;whereas it is true that in the Factoryat Chorzbwcasethe
Permanent Court of International Justice declined to indicate interim
measures of protection on the ground that the request in that case was
"designed to obtain an interimjudgment in favour of a part of the claim"
(Orderof21 November 1927,P.C.I.J., SeriesA, No. 12,at p. 10) ; whereas,
however, thecircumstances of that case wereentirelydifferentfrom those
of thepresent one,and therequesttheresought toobtain from the Court a
finaljudgment on part of a claimfor a sum of money ;whereas,moreover,
a request for provisional measures must by its very nature relate to the
substance of the case since, as Article 41 expressly States,their object is to
preserve the respectiverights of either party ; and whereas in the present
casethe purpose of theUnited Statesrequestappears to be not toobtain a
judgment, interim or final, on the merits of its claims but to preserve the
substance of the rights which it claimspendente lite ;
29. Whereas, in the second place, the Government of Iran takes the
position that "since provisional measures are by definition intended to
protect the interests of the parties they cannot be unilateral" ;whereas,
however,thehypothesis onwhich thisproposition isbased does notaccord
with the terms of Article 41 of the Statute which refer explicitly to "any
provisional measures which ought to be taken to preserve the respective
rights of either party" ; whereas the whole concept of an indication of
provisional measures, as Article 73 of the Rules recognizes, implies a PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15XII 79) 16
mique de l'Iran i<relkveessentiellementet directement de la souveraineté
nationale de l'Iran ));que toutefois un différendconcernant des locaux
diplomatiqueset consulaires et la détention depersonnes internationale-
ment protégéeset mettant en jeu l'interprétation ou l'application de
conventionsmultilatéralesqui codifient le droit international en matière
derelationsdiplomatiques et consulaires relève,par sanature même,dela
juridiction internationale ;
26. Considérant par conséquentque les deux considérations avancées
par le Gouvernement de l'Iran dans sa lettre du 9 décembre 1979 ne
sauraient, selonla Cour,êtretenues pourunobstacle à cequ'elleconnaisse
del'affaire dont elle a étésaisie par la requêtedes Etats-Unis en date du
29 novembre 1979 ;
27. Considérant que,dans la mêmelettre du 9décembre1979,le Gou-
vernement de l'Iran présenteégalement deuxconsidérations sur la base
desquellesil affirme qu'en tout état decause la Cour ne doitpas accéder à
la demandeenindication de mesuresconservatoires présentéeen l'espèce
par les Etats-Unis ;
28. Considérantqu'il soutient en premier lieu quela demande en indi-
cation de mesuresconservatoires, telle qu'ellea été formuléepar les Etats-
Unis, i<implique en fait que la Cour ait jugé de la substance mêmede
l'affaire quilui est soumise ));considérantquedans l'affaire de l'Usinede
Chorzbwla Cour permanente deJusticeinternationale s'estcertes abstenue
d'indiquer des mesures conservatoires, motif pris de ce qu'en l'espècela
demande tendait à (<obtenir un jugement provisionnel adjugeant une
partie des conclusions (ordonnancedu21 novembre 1927,C.P.J.I. sérieA
no 112,p. 10) ; considérant cependant que dans ladite affaire les circons-
tances étaienttotalementdifférentesde cellesde laprésenteespèceetqu'il
s'agissait alorsd'obtenir de la Cour une décisiondéfinitivesur une partie
de la demande de dédommagement monétaire ; considérant en outre
qu'une demande en indication de mesures conservatoires a nécessaire-
ment, par sa nature même, unlien avec la substance de l'affaire puisque,
comme l'article 41 l'indique expressément, son objet est de protéger le
droit de chacun ;et qu'en la présente espécele but de la demande des
Etats-Unis ne paraît pas être d'obtenir un jugement, provisionnel ou
définitif, sur le fond des réclamationsmais de protégerpendente lite la
substance des droits invoqués ;
29. Considérantque le Gouvernement de l'Iran soutient en second lieu
que, ilesmesuresconservatoires étantpar définitiondestinées àprotéger
les intérêtsdes parties en cause, elles ne pourraient avoir le caractère
unilatéral ); considérant cependantque le point de départde cette thèse
ne correspond pas aux termes de l'article 41 du Statut qui vise expressé-
ment les (<mesures conservatoires du droit de chacun[devant]êtreprises
à titre provisoire ; considérant que l'idéemêmed'une indication de
mesures conservatoires, comme l'article73 du Règlement le reconnaît,17 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
request from one of the parties for measures to preserve its own rights
against action by the other party calculated to prejudice those rights
pendente lite ;whereas it follows that a request for provisional measures is
by its nature unilateral ;and whereas the Govemment of Iran has not
appeared beforetheCourt in order to requesttheindication ofprovisional
measures ;whereas, however, theCourt, as it has recognized in Article 75
of its Rules, must at al1times be alert to protect the nghts of both the
parties in proceedings beforeit and, in indicating provisional measures,
has not infrequently done so with reference to both the parties ;and
whereas this does not, and cannot, mean that the Court is precludedfrom
entertaining a request from a party merely by reason of the fact that
measures which it requests are unilateral ;
30. Whereas, accordingly, neither of the considerations put fonvard in
the Iranian Government's letter of 9 December 1979can be regarded as
constituting grounds whch should lead the Court to decline to entertain
the United States request in the present case ;
31. Whereas it follows that the Court has not found in the Irarian
Government's letter of 9 December 1979legalgrounds whch should lead
it to conclude that it ought not to entertain the United States request ;
32. Whereas the Court will accordingly now proceed to examine the
request of the United StatesGovernment for theindication of provisional
measures in the present case ;
33. Whereas by the terms of Article 41 of the Statute the Court may
indicate such measures only when it considers that circumstances so
require in order to preserve the rights of either party ;
34. Whereas the circumstances alleged by the United States Govern-
ment which, in the submission of that Government,require theindication
of provisional measures in the present case may be summarized as fol-
lows :
(i) On 4 November 1979,in the course of a demonstration outside the
United States Ernbassycompound inTehran, demonstratorsattacked
the Embassypremises ;no Iranian security forcesintervened or were
sent to relieve the situation, despite repeated calls for help from the
Embassy to the Iranian authorities. Ultimately the whole of the
Embassy prernises was invaded. The Embassy personnel, including
consular and non-Amencan staff,andvisitors whowerepresentinthe
Embassy at the time wereseized.Shortly aftenvards, according to the
United StatesGovernment,itsconsulatesin Tabriz and Shiraz,which PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15 XII79) 17
suppose qu'une desparties sollicite des mesures pour protégerses droits
propres contre tout acte de l'autre partie de natureà leurporter préjudice
pendente lite; considérantqu'ilen découlequ'une demandeen indication
de mesures conservatoires est par nature unilatérale ; et que le Gouver-
nement de l'Iran n'a pas comparudevant la Cour pour solliciter l'indica-
tion de mesures conservatoires ;considérantcependantque la Cour,ainsi
qu'ilressort de l'article 75 de son Règlement,doit veiller en tout temps à
protégerles droits des deux parties dans les instances qui se déroulent
devant elle et qu'il n'estpas rare qu'en indiquant des mesures conserva-
toiresellesesoitadresséeauxdeuxparties ;et que celane signifiepaset ne
saurait signifierque la Cour ne puisse connaître d'une demandeémanant
d'uneseulepartie pour la simpleraison que lesmesures sollicitéesseraient
unilatérales ;
30. Considéranten conséquenceque ni l'une ni l'autre des considéra-
tions énoncéep sar leGouvernement del'Iran danssalettredu 9décembre
1979ne saurait constituerun motif qui doive amener la Cour à refuser de
connaître de la demande des Etats-Unis en l'espèce ;
31. Considérantqu'il découlede ce qui précède que, dans la lettre du
Gouvernement del'Iran endate du9 décembre1979,la Courne trouvepas
de motifsjuridiques l'amenant àconclure qu'ellene doit pas sesaisir dela
demande des Etats-Unis ;
32. Considérantqu'en conséquencela Cour seproposed'aborder l'exa-
men de la demande en indication de mesuresconservatoires présentéepar
le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis en l'espèce ;
33. Considérantqu'aux termesde l'article41 du Statut la Cour ne peut
indiquer de tellesmesures que si elleestime que lescirconstances l'exigent
pour sauvegarder les droits de chacune des parties ;
34. Considérant que les circonstances alléguées par le Gouvernement
des Etats-Unis, et qui, selon ce gouvernement, exigent l'indication de
mesures conservatoiresen l'espèce, peuventêtrerésuméescomme suit :
i) Le 4 novembre 1979,au cours d'une manifestation qui se déroulait
devantl'enceinte de l'ambassadedes Etats-Unis àTéhéran,desmani-
festants ont attaquéleslocaux de l'ambassade ;aucuneforce de sécu-
rité iranienne n'est intervenue ou n'a étéenvoyéepour rétablir la
situation, en dépit d'appels répétés à l'aide adresséspar l'ambassade
aux autoritésiraniennes.Pourfinir,tous leslocauxdel'ambassadeont
été envahis. Le personnel de l'ambassade, ycompris des membres du
personnel consulaire et des agentsnon américains,ainsique des visi-
teurs qui se trouvaient à ce moment à l'ambassade, ont été capturés.18 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
had been attacked earlier in 1979,werealso seized,without any action
being taken to prevent it.
(ii)Sincethat time, the premises of the United States Embassy in Tehran,
and of the consulates in Tabriz and Shiraz, have remained in the
hands of thepersons who seizedthem. These persons have ransacked
the archives and documentsboth of the diplomatic mission and of its
consular section. The Embassy personnel and other persons seizedat
the time of the attack havebeen held hostage with theexception of 13
persons released on 18 and 20 November 1979.Those holding the
hostages have refused to release them, save on condition of the ful-
filment by the United States of various demands regarded by it as
unacceptable. The hostages arestatedto have frequently been bound,
blindfolded, and subjected to severe discomfort, complete isolation
and threats that they would be put on trial or even put to death. The
United States Government affirms that it has reason to believe that
some of them may have been transferred to other places of confine-
ment.
(iii) The Government of the United States considers that not merely has
the Iranian Governmentfailed to prevent theeventsdescribed above,
but alsothat there is clear evidence of its complicityin, and approval
of, those events.
(iv) The persons held hostage in the premises of the United States Em-
bassy inTehran include,according to theinformationfurnished to the
Court by theAgent of theUnited States, at least 28persons having the
status,duly recognized by theGovernment of Iran, of "member of the
diplomatic staff" within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations of 1961 ;at least 20 persons having the status,
similarly recognized, of "member of the administrative and technical
staff" withinthemeaning of that Convention ; and two otherpersons
of United Statesnationality not possessing either diplomatic or con-
sular status. Of the persons with the status of member of the diplo-
matic staff, four are members of the Consular Section of the Em-
bassy.
(v) In addition to thepersons held hostage in the premises of the Tehran
Embassy, the United StatesChargé d'Affaires in Iran and two other
United States diplomatic agents are detained in the premises of
the Irànian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, incircumstances which the
Government of the United Stateshas not been able to make entirely
clear, but which apparently involve restriction of their freedom of
movement, and a threat to their inviolabilityas diplomats ;
35. Whereas on the basis of the above circumstances alleged by the
United States Government it claims in the Application that the Govern-
ment of Iran hasviolatedand isviolatinganumber of the legalobligations
imposed upon it by the Vienna Convention on Diplornatic Relations of PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD.15 XII79) 18
Peu après, selon le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis, les consulats des
Etats-Unis àTabnz et à Chiraz, qui avaient été attaqués audébut de
l'année1979,ont étéégalement occupéssans que rien soit fait pour
empêchercette occupation.
ii) Depuis lors, les locaux de l'ambassade des Etats-Unis à Téhéranet
ceux desconsulats à Tabriz età Chiraz sont restésaux mains de leurs
occupants. Ceux-ci ont mis au pillageles archiveset lesdocumentsde
lamission diplomatique des Etats-Unis et de sasectionconsulaire. Les
membres du personnel de l'ambassade et les autres personnes captu-
réesau moment de l'attaque ont étéretenus en otages, sauf treize
d'entre eux qui ont étérelâchés les18et 20novembre 1979.Ceux qui
détiennentles otages ont refuséde les libérertant que le Gouverne-
ment des Etats-Unis ne céderait pas à diverses exigencesque ce gou-
vernement considèreinacceptables. Selon ce qui a étédit, les otages
sont souvent liéset lesyeuxbandés,soumis à un régimetrèspénible, à
l'isolementcompletetsont menacésd'êtrjeugésouéventuellementmis
à mort. LeGouvernement desEtats-Unisaffirme qu'iladesraisons de
penserquecertainsd'entre eux ont peut-être été transférésdans d'au-
tres lieux de détention.
iü) De l'avis du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis, non seulement le Gou-
vernement de l'Iran n'a rien fait pour prévenir les événementq sui
viennent d'êtreévoquésm , ais la preuve est clairement faite qu'il s'en
est rendu complice et les a approuvés.
iv) D'aprèsles renseignements fournis à la Cour par l'agent des Etats-
Unis, lespersonnesdétenuesen otages dans leslocaux de l'ambassade
des Etats-Unis à Téhérancomprennentau moinsvingt-huit personnes
ayant la qualité, dûment reconnuepar le Gouvernement de l'Iran, de
(<membres du personnel diplomatique au sens de la convention de
Vienne de 1961sur les relations diplomatiques ;au moins vingt per-
sonnes ayant la qualité,également reconnue,de (membres du per-
sonnel administratif et technique ))au sens de cette convention ; et
deux autres ressortissants des Etats-Unis n'ayant ni statut diploma-
tique ni statut consulaire. Quatre des personnes qui ont la qualité
de membres du personnel diplomatique appartiennent à la section
consulaire de l'ambassade.
v) Outre lespersonnesdétenuesenotagesdans leslocauxdel'ambassade
à Téhéran,le chargéd'affairesen Iran et deux autres agents diploma-
tiques des Etats-Unis sont détenus dans les locaux du ministère des
affairesétrangèresd'Iran, dans des conditions que le Gouvernement
des Etats-Unis n'a pas pu entièrement élucider maisqui comporte-
raient apparemment des restrictions à leur libertéde mouvement et
une mise en cause de leur inviolabilitéen tant que diplomates ;
35. Considérant que, sur la base desfaits ainsi alléguésar le Gouver-
nement des Etats-Unis, celui-cifait valoir dans sa requêtequele Gouver-
nement de l'Iran a violéet viole encore un certain nombre d'obligations
juridiques que lui imposent la convention de Vienne de 1961 sur les19 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
1961,the Vienna Convention on ConsularRelations of 1963,theTreaty of
Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the
United States of 1955,the Convention on the Preventionand Punishment
of CrimesagainstInternationally ProtectedPersons,includingDiplomatic
Agents, of 1973,the Charter of the United Nations, and customaryinter-
national law ;
36. Whereas the power of the Court to indicate provisional measures
under Article 41of the Statute of theCourt hasas its object to preservethe
respective rights of the parties pending the decision of the Court, and
presupposes that irreparable prejudice should not be caused to rights
which are the subject of dispute injudicial proceedings ;
37. Whereas the rights which the United States of America subrnits as
entitled to protection by the indication of provisional measures were
specified in the request of 29 November 1979as :
"the rights of its nationals to life,liberty,protection and security ;the
rights of inviolability,irnmunity and protection for itsdiplomaticand
consular officiais;and therights of inviolability and protection for its
diplomatic and consular premises" ;
and at the hearing of 10December 1979as :
"the right [of the United States] to maintain a working and effective
embassy in Tehran, the right to have its diplomatic and consular
personnel protected in their lives and persons from every form of
interference and abuse, and the right to have its nationals protected
and secure" ;
and whereas the measuresrequestedby the United States for the protec-
tion of these rights are as set out in paragraphs 2 and 12 above ;
38. Whereas there is no morefundamental prerequisite for the conduct
of relations between States than theinviolability of diplomatic envoysand
embassies, so that throughout history nations of al1creeds and cultures
have observed reciprocal obligations for that purpose ; and whereas the
obligations thus assumed,notably those for assuring the persona1safetyof
diplomats and their freedomfromprosecution, are essential,unqualified,
and inherent in their representative character and their diplomatic func-
tion ;
39. Whereas the institution of diplomacy, with its concomitant privi-
legesand immunities,has withstoodthe test of centuriesand proved tobe
an instrument essential for effective co-operation in the international
community, and for enablingStates,irrespective of their differing consti-
tutional and social systems, to achieve mutual understanding and to
resolve their differences by peaceful means ;
40. Whereas the unimpeded conduct of consular relations, which have
also been established between peoples since ancient times, is no less PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15 XII 79) 19
relationsdiplomatiques,la convention de Vienne de 1963sur lesrelations
consulaires,le traitéd'amitiéd , ecommerceet de droitsconsulaires de 1955
entrel'Iran et les Etats-Unis,laconvention de 1973surlapréventionet la
répression desinfractionscontre les personnes jouissant d'une protection
internationale,ycompris les agentsdiplomatiques, la Charte des Nations
Unies et le droit international coutumier ;
36. Considérant que le pouvoir d'indiquer des mesures conservatoires
quel'article 41du Statut confère à la Courapour objetde sauvegarder les
droits de chacunedespartiesen attendant que la Courrendesa décisionet
présupposequ'un préjudiceirréparablene doitpasêtrecauséauxdroitsen
litige dans une procédurejudiciaire ;
37. Considérant queles droits qui, d'après les Etats-Unis d'Amérique,
devraientêtreprotégéspar l'indication de mesures conservatoires ont été
spécifiésdans la demande du 29 novembre 1979comme étant :
(<lesdroits de leursressortissantsà lavie,à laliberté,àlaprotectionet
àla sécurité ;lesdroits àl'inviolabilitéà l'immunitéet à laprotection
de leurs fonctionnaires diplomatiques et consulaires ; les droits à
l'inviolabilité età la protection de leurs locaux diplomatiques et
consulaires )>;
et, àl'audience du 10décembre 1979,comme :
(le droit [desEtats-Unis]d'avoir à Téhéranune ambassadequifonc-
tionne normalement, le droit à ce que la vie et la personne de leurs
agents diplomatiques et consulaires soient protégéescontre toute
interventionet tout excèset le droit à laprotection et à la sécuritéde
leursressortissants ));
et considérant que les mesures sollicitéespar les Etats-Unis pour assurer
la protection de ces droits sont énoncées auxparagraphes 2 et 12 ci-
dessus ;
38. Considérantque, dansla conduite des relationsentreEtats, il n'est
pas d'exigence plus fondamentale que celle de l'inviolabilité desdiplo-
mates et des ambassadeset que c'est ainsi que, au long de l'histoire, des
nations de toutes croyances et toutes culturesont observédesobligations
réciproques àcet effet; etque lesobligations ainsiassuméespour garantir
en particulierla sécuritépersonnelle des diplomateset leur exemption de
toutepoursuite sont essentielles,ne comportent aucunerestriction et sont
inhérentes à leur caractère représentatif et à leur fonction diploma-
tique ;
39. Considérantquel'institution de la diplomatie, avec les privilègeset
immunitésquis'yrattachent, a résisté à l'épreuve dessiècleset s'estavérée
un instrument essentiel de coopération efficace dans la communauté
internationale, qui permet aux Etats, nonobstant les différencesde leurs
systèmes constitutionnels et sociaux, de parvenir à la compréhension
mutuelle et de résoudre leurs divergences par des moyens pacifiques ;
40. Considérant que le déroulementsans entrave des relations consu-
laires, également nouéesentre les peuples depuis des temps anciens, n'est20 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
important in the context of present-day international law, in promoting
the development of friendly relations among nations, and ensuring pro-
tection and assistance for aliens residentin the territories of other States ;
and whereas therefore the privileges and immunities of consular officers
and consular employees, and the inviolability of consular premises and
archives, are similarly principles deep-rooted in international law ;
41. Whereas, while no State is under any obligation to maintain dip-
lomatic or consular relations with another, yet it cannot fail to recognize
the imperative obligations inherent therein, now codified in the Vienna
Conventions of 1961and 1963,to which both Iran and the United States
are parties ;
42. Whereas continuance of the situation the subject of the present
request exposes the human beings concerned to privation, hardship,
anguish and evendanger to lifeand health and thus to a seriouspossibility
of irreparable harm ;
43. Whereas in connection with the present request the Court cannot
fail to take note of theprovisions of theConvention on thePreventionand
Punishment of Crimes against Intemationally Protected Persons,includ-
ing Diplomatic Agents, of 1973,to which both Iran and the United States
are parties ;
44. Whereasin thelight of the severalconsiderations set out above, the
Court finds that the circumstancesrequire it to indicate provisional mea-
sures, as provided by Article 41 of the Statute of the Court, in order to
preserve the rights claimed ;
45. Whereas the decision given in the present proceedings in no way
prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with the
merits of the case or any questionsrelating to the merits themselves, and
leavesunaffectedthe right of theGovernment of Iranto submitarguments
against suchjurisdiction or in respect of such merits ;
46. Whereas the Court will therefore now proceed to indicate the mea-
sures which it considers are required in the present case ;
47. Accordingly,
unanimously,
1. Indicates, pending its final decision in the proceedingsinstituted on
29November 1979by the United States of America against the Islamic
Republic of Iran, the following provisional measures : PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD. 15XII 79) 20
pasmoins important dans lecontexte du droitinternational contemporain,
en ce qu'il favorise le développement des relations amicales entre les
nations et assure protection et assistance aux étrangers résidant sur le
territoire d'autres Etats considérant dès lors queles privilègeset immu-
nités des fonctionnaires et employés consulaires et l'inviolabilité des
locaux et archives consulairessont eux aussi des principes de droit inter-
national profondément enracinés ;
41. Considérant qu'aucun Etat n'a l'obligation d'entretenir des rela-
tionsdiplomatiques ou consulaires avecun autreEtat, maisqu'il nesaurait
manquer de reconnaître lesobligationsimpérativesqu'ellescomportent et
qui sont maintenant codifiéesdans les conventions de Vienne de 1961et
1963auxquelles l'Iran et les Etats-Unis sont parties ;
42. Considérant que la persistance de la situation qui fait l'objet de la
requêteexpose les êtres humains concernés à des privations, à un sort
pénibleet angoissantet même à des dangerspour leur vie et leur santéet
par conséquent à une possibilitésérieuse depréjudice irréparable ;
43. Considérant à cet égard que la Cour note les dispositions de la
convention de 1973surlapréventionetlarépressiondesinfractionscontre
les personnes jouissant d'une protection internationale, y compris les
agents diplomatiques, à laquelle l'Iran et les Etats-Unis sont partie;
44. Considérant que,étantdonnécequiprécède,laCourconclutque les
circonstances exigent qu'elle indique des mesures conservatoires, ainsi
qu'il est prévu à l'article41 du Statut, en vue de sauvegarder les droits
invoqués ;
45. Considérant qu'une décision rendueen la présente procédure ne
préjuge en rien la compétence de la Cour pour connaître du fond de
l'affaire ni aucune question relative au fond lui-mêmeet qu'elle laisse
intact le droit du Gouvernement de l'Iran de faire valoir ses moyens tant
sur la compétence que sur le fond ;
46. Considérant quela Cour doit en conséquenceindiquer maintenant
les mesures qu'elle estime nécessairesen la présenteespèce ;
47. En conséquence,
LACOUR,
à l'unanimité,
1. Indiqu àtitre provisoire, en attendant son arrêtdéfinitifdans l'ins-
tance introduitele 29novembre 1979par lesEtats-Unisd'Amériquecontre
la Républiqueislamiqued'Iran, lesmesures conservatoiressuivantes,ten-
dant à ce que : 21 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFF (ORDER 15XII 79)
A. (i) The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran should immedi-
ately ensure that the prernisesof the United States Embassy, Chancery
and Consulates be restored to the possession of the United States
authorities under their exclusive control, and should ensure their
inviolabilityand effectiveprotection asprovided for by the treatiesin
force between the two States, and by general international law ;
(ii) The Govemment of theIslamicRepublic of Iran should ensure the
immediate release, without any exception, of al1persons of United
States nationality who are or have been held in the Embassy of the
United States of America or in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in
Tehran, or have been held as hostages elsewhere, and afford full pro-
tection to al1such persons, in accordance with the treaties in force
between the two States, and with general international law ;
(iii) The Govemment of the IslamicRepublic of Iran should,as from
that moment,afford to al1thediplomatic and consularpersonnel of the
United States the full protection, privileges and immunities to which
they are entitledunder thetreaties in forcebetween the two States,and
under generalinternational law,includingimmunityfrom anyform of
criminaljurisdiction andfreedom and facilitiesto leavethe territory of
Iran ;
B. TheGovernment of theUnited States ofAmerica and the Govemment
of the IslamicRepublic of Iran shouldnot take any action and should
ensure that no action istaken which mayaggravatethetension between
the two countries or render the existing dispute more difficult of
solution ;
2. Decidesthat, until theCourt deliversits finaljudgment in thepresent
case, it will keep the matters covered by this Order continuously under
review.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at
the PeacePalace,The Hague, ths fifteenthday ofDecember, one thousand
nine hundred and seventy-nine,infour copies, ofwhich onewillbe placed
in the archives at the Court,and the others transmitted respectively to the
Govemment of the Islarnic Republic of Iran, to the Government of the
United States of America, and to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations for transmission to the Security Council.
(Signed) Humphrey WALDOCK,
President.
(Signed) S. AQUARONE,
Registrar. PERSONNEL DIPLOMATIQUE ET CONSULAIRE (ORD15 XII 79) 21
A. i) Le Gouvernement de la République islamique d'Iran fasse imrné-
diatement en sorteque leslocaux de l'ambassade, de la chancellerie et
des consulatsdes Etats-Unis soient remis en possession des autorités
des Etats-Unis et placés sous leur contrôle exclusif et assure leur
inviolabilitéet leur protection effective conformément aux traités en
vigueur entre les deux Etats et au droit international général
ii) Le Gouvernement de la République islamique d'Iran assure la
libérationimmédiateetsans aucune exception de tous lesressortissants
des Etats-Unis qui sont ou ont étédétenus à l'ambassade des Etats-
Unis d'Amériqueou au ministèredes affairesétrangères à Téhéranou
qui ont étédétenusen otagesailleurs et accorde pleine protectioàces
personnesconformément aux traitésen vigueur entre lesdeux Etats et
au droit international général
iii) Le Gouvernement de la Républiqueislamiqued'Iran reconnaisse
désormais à tous lesmembres dupersonneldiplomatique et consulaire
des Etats-Unis la plénitride de la protection, des privilèges et des
immunitésauxquelsils ont droit conformément aux traités envigueur
entre les deux Etats et au droit international général,notamment
l'immunité àl'égardde touteformedejuridiction criminelleetlaliberté
et les moyens de quitter le territoire iran;en
B. Le Gouvernementdes Etats-Unis d'Amérique etle Gouvernement de
laRépubliqueislamique d'Iran neprennent aucune mesure, et veillent
àcequ'il n'en soitpris aucune,quisoitdenature à aggraver la tension
entre les deux pays ou à rendre plus difficile la solution du différend
existant ;
2. Décid qeue,jusqu'à ce que la Cour rende son arrêtdéfinitifen l'es-
pèce,elle demeurera saisie des questions qui font l'objet de la présente
ordonnance.
Fait en anglais et en français, le texte anglais faisant foi, au palais dela
Paix, àLa Haye, le quinze décembremil neuf cent soixante-dix-neuf,en
quatre exemplaires, dont l'un restera déposéaux archives de la Cour et
dont les autres seront transmis respectivement au Gouvernement de la
République islamique d'Iran, au Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amé-
rique et au Secrétairegénéralde l'organisation des Nations Unies pour
transmission au Conseil de sécurité.
Le Président,
(Signé)Humphrey WALDOCK.
Le Greffier,
(Signé)S. AQUARONE.
Request for the indication of Provisional Measures
Order of 15 December 1979