denied free access both to his diplomatic colleagues from other Embassies and to senior Iranian officials. Moreover, the Government of Iran, from an early stage of the crisis, has given direct support and encouragement to the group holding the Embassy.

Members of that group have been permitted to come and go freely from the compound. The Government of Iran has refused or ignored the repeated requests of the Government of the United States to free the hostages and to restore the Embassy compound to the possesion of the United States. The Government of Iran has supported the demands of those holding the hostages, has endorsed the charges of espionage leveled against Embassy personnel, and has threatened to place the personnel on trial for

espionage.

II.

The Jurisdiction of the Court

Under Paragraph 1 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, the jurisdiction of the Court encompasses "all matters specially provided for.

in treaties and conventions in force." The United States and Iran are, as members of the United Nations, parties to the Statute, and are also parties to three international conventions, each of which independently establishes the Court's jurisdiction over the present dispute.

First, the United States and Iran are parties to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (done at Vienna, April 18, 1961) and to its Optional Protocol Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. As set forth separately in this application, the actions of Iran bearing on this dispute constitute multiple and profound violations of that Convention. Article I of the Protocol provides:

"Disputes arising out of the interpretation
or application of the Convention shall lie
within the compulsory jurisdiction of the
International 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."

Second, the United States and Iran are parties to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (done at Vienna,

April 24, 1963) and to its Optional Protocol Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. Article I of that Protocol is identical in its terms to Article I of the Protocol */ to the Convention on Diplomatic Relations, supra. The present dispute involves numerous violations of the Consular Convention.

Finally, the United States and Iran are parties to the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between the United States and Iran, signed in Tehran on August 15, 1955 (284 U.N.T.S. 93). As set

11

in lieu

*/ Articles II and III of the Protocols to the Vienna
Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations both
provide that the parties may agree on alternate
procedures -- arbitration or conciliation
of proceeding directly to this Court. No such agreements
have been made. Indeed, the Iranian authorities have
refused to discuss the dispute still less modes of
settlement of it--with United States emissaries. The
terms of the preambles to both Protocols demonstrate the
intent of the protocols to make recourse to the Court
unconditional and not dependent upon joint pursuit by the
parties of the options of arbitration or conciliation.
They provide that: "expressing their wish to resort
in all matters concerning them in respect of any dispute
arising out of the interpretation or application of the
Convention to the compulsory jurisdiction of the
International Court of Justice, unless some other form
of settlement has been agreed upon by the parties within
a reasonable period
(Emphasis supplied.)

....

forth below, numerous and serious violations of this treaty are also involved in the present dispute. Article XXI, Paragraph 2 of the treaty provides:

"Any dispute between the High Contracting Parties as to the interpretation or application of the present Treaty, not satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice, unless the High Contracting Parties agree to settlement by some other pacific means."

That a dispute exists between the United States and Iran is clear. The present dispute has not been satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy, Iran is continuing in its violations, and Iran has refused to discuss pacific settlement of the dispute.

In addition to the foregoing, the United States and Iran are parties to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, Including Diplomatic Agents (done at New York, December 14, 1973). Serious violations of this Convention are also involved in the present dispute. Article 13, Paragraph 1 of the Convention provides:

"Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention which is not settled by negotiations shall, at the request. of one of them, be submitted to arbitration. If within six months from the date of the request for arbitration the parties are unable to agree on the organization of the arbitration, any one of them may refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice by request in conformity with the Statute of the Court."

In light of the urgency of rectifying the present violations of the Convention and Iran's refusal to meet with United States emissaries on the subject, which renders impracticable and infeasible any prior resort to arbitration, it is submitted that the Court is competent to hear the United States' claims under this Convention in connection with its other claims.

III. The Claims of the United States

The Government of the United States, in submitting the dispute to the Court, claims as follows:

(a) Pursuant to Article 29 of the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Govern-
ment of Iran is under an international legal
obligation to the United States to ensure that
the persons of United States diplomatic
agents be kept inviolate from "any form of
arrest or detention" and that every such
diplomatic agent shall be treated "with due
respect" and protected from "any attack on
his person, freedom, or dignity." The Govern-
ment of Iran has violated and is currently
violating the foregoing obligations.

(b) Pursuant to Article 37 of the same
Convention, the Government of Iran is under
an international legal obligation to the
United States to ensure that members of the
administrative and technical staff of the
United States Embassy in Tehran, and members
of the families of United States diplomatic

agents and of administrative and technical staff, enjoy the relevant privileges and immunities specified in Article 29 of the Convention. The Government of Iran has violated

and is currently violating the foregoing

obligations.

(c) Pursuant to Article 31 of the same Convention, the Government of Iran is under an international legal obligation to the United States to ensure that its diplomatic agents shall be absolutely immune "from the criminal jurisdiction" of Iran and that, under Articles 31 and 37 of the Convention, such immunity is accorded to members of the administrative and technical staff of the United States Embassy as well as to the families of diplomatic agents and of administrative and technical staff. By its threats of prosecution, the Government of Iran has violated and is

currently violating the foregoing obligations. (a) Pursuant to Article 22 of the same Convention, the Government of Iran is under an international legal obligation to the United States to ensure that United States diplomatic premises in Iran "shall be inviolable." The Government of Iran has violated and is currently violating this obligation.