LAWFUL MEANS IN DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR INFORMATION-GATHERING UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTIONS: A DOCTRINAL AND OPERATIONAL REASSESSMENT

Öz

This article offers a doctrinal and operational reassessment of the phrase “by all lawful means” in Article 3(1)(d) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and Article 5(c) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, specifically in relation to the function of ascertaining conditions and developments in the receiving State and reporting thereon. It argues that this formula should be understood not as a rhetorical qualification or a descriptive reference to diplomatic propriety, but as an autonomous legal standard conditioning the permissibility of diplomatic and consular information-gathering. The study proceeds through a classical method of treaty interpretation grounded in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, combining textual analysis with a contextual and systemic reading of the Vienna framework. On that basis, the article contends that the decisive legal issue is not merely the substantive sensitivity of the information pursued, but primarily the lawfulness of the methods used to access, verify, process, and transmit it. It rejects both a restrictive understanding that would reduce diplomatic and consular reporting to passive reception of formally communicated facts, and an expansive understanding that would tolerate any efficient technique so long as the overall purpose remains connected to representation or protection of interests. The article instead proposes a structured typology of three categories of methods: methods that are presumptively lawful, methods that require heightened legal scrutiny, and methods that are incompatible with the Vienna regime because they rely on deception, inducement, circumvention of legal safeguards, intrusive access, or abusive recourse to privileges and immunities. It concludes that “lawful means” constitutes the juridical hinge through which the Vienna system reconciles informational necessity with the rule-bound structure of diplomatic and consular relations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
• Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
• Lawful Means
• Diplomatic Information-Gathering
• Consular Information-Gathering
• Non-Interference
• Treaty Interpretation
• Diplomatic Law

VİYANA SÖZLEŞMELERİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE DİPLOMATİK VE KONSÜLER BİLGİ TOPLAMADA HUKUKA UYGUN YOLLARIN DOKTRİNEL VE OPERASYONEL AÇIDAN YENİDEN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu makale, Diplomatik İlişkiler Hakkında Viyana Sözleşmesi’nin 3(1)(d) maddesinde ve Konsolosluk İlişkileri Hakkında Viyana Sözleşmesi’nin 5(c) maddesinde yer alan “hukuka uygun tüm yollarla” ibaresini, kabul eden Devletteki koşul ve gelişmelerin saptanması ve bunların gönderen Devlete raporlanması bağlamında, doktrinel ve operasyonel açıdan yeniden değerlendirmektedir. Çalışmanın temel tezi, bu ibarenin yalnızca diplomatik nezakete gönderme yapan retorik ya da betimleyici bir ifade olarak değil, diplomatik ve konsüler bilgi toplama faaliyetlerinin hukuki sınırlarını belirleyen özerk bir normatif ölçüt olarak anlaşılması gerektiğidir. Makale, Viyana Antlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi’nin 31 ve 32. maddelerine dayanan klasik antlaşma yorumu yöntemiyle, metinsel çözümlemeyi Viyana rejiminin bütününe yönelik bağlamsal ve sistematik bir okumayla birleştirmektedir. Bu çerçevede çalışma, belirleyici hukuki meselenin; elde edilmek istenen bilginin siyasi, ekonomik veya stratejik hassasiyeti değil, bu bilginin elde edilmesi, doğrulanması, işlenmesi ve aktarılmasında kullanılan yöntemlerin hukuka uygunluğu olduğunu ileri sürmektedir. Bu nedenle makale, bir yandan diplomatik ve konsüler raporlamayı yalnızca resmî olarak bildirilen olguların pasif biçimde alınmasına indirgeyen dar yorumu, diğer yandan genel amaç temsil veya menfaatlerin korunmasıyla bağlantılı kaldığı sürece her etkili tekniği kabul eden geniş yorumu reddetmektedir. Bunun yerine çalışma, üçlü bir yöntem tipolojisi önermektedir: kural olarak hukuka uygun yöntemler, yoğun hukuki denetim gerektiren yöntemler ve aldatma, yönlendirme, hukuki güvencelerin dolanılması, müdahaleci erişim biçimleri veya ayrıcalık ve bağışıklıkların kötüye kullanılması nedeniyle Viyana rejimiyle bağdaşmayan yöntemler. Sonuç olarak makale, “hukuka uygun yollar” ifadesinin, bilgiye duyulan işlevsel ihtiyaç ile diplomatik ve konsüler ilişkilerin hukuka bağlı yapısı arasındaki dengeyi sağlayan hukuki eksen olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Diplomatik İlişkiler Hakkında Viyana Sözleşmesi
• Konsolosluk İlişkileri Hakkında Viyana Sözleşmesi
• Hukuka Uygun Yollar
• Diplomatik Bilgi Toplama
• Konsüler Bilgi Toplama
• İçişlerine Karışmama
• Andlaşma Yorumu
• Diplomasi Hukuku

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad, Nehaluddin. “The Obligation of Diplomats to Respect the Laws and Regulations of the Hosting State: A Critical Overview of the International Practices.” Laws 9, no. 3 (2020): 18.
2. Archetti, Cristina. “The Impact of New Media on Diplomatic Practice: An Evolutionary Model of Change.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 7, no. 2 (2012): 181-206.
3. Barker, J. Craig. The Abuse of Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities: A Necessary Evil? Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1996.
4. Barrinha, André. “Cyber-diplomacy: The Emergence of a Transient Field.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 19, no. 3 (2024): 439-466.
5. Bayne, Nicholas, and Stephen Woolcock, eds. The New Economic Diplomacy. 4th ed. London: Routledge, 2017.
6. Behrens, Paul. Diplomatic Interference and the Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2016.
7. Berridge, G. R. Diplomacy: Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
8. Bianchi, Andrea, and Fuad Zarbiyev. “The Province of the Rules of Treaty Interpretation.” In Demystifying Treaty Interpretation, 1-22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024.

9. Birka, Ieva, Didzis Kļaviņš, and Roberts Kits. “Duty of Care: Consular Diplomacy Response of Baltic and Nordic Countries to COVID-19.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 18, no. 1 (2022): 133-164.
10. Bjola, Corneliu. “Diplomatic Ethics.” In The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, edited by Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp, 123-33. London: SAGE, 2016.
11. Bjola, Corneliu. “The Ethics of Secret Diplomacy: A Contextual Approach.” Journal of Global Ethics 10, no. 1 (2014): 85-100. doi:10.1080/17449626.2013.858761.
12. Cahier, Philippe. Le droit diplomatique contemporain. Genève: E. Droz, 1962.
13. Campanale, Stelio. “Prerogatives of Consular Function.” In Contemporary Diplomatic and Consular Relations: Selected Aspects, edited by Paraskevi Naskou-Perraki, 103- 123. Cham: Springer, 2025.
14. Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran). Judgment. I.C.J. Reports 1980, 3.
15. Chesterman, Simon. “The Spy Who Came in from the Cold War: Intelligence and International Law.” Michigan Journal of International Law 27, no. 4 (2006): 1071- 1130.
16. Cull, Nicholas J. Public Diplomacy: Foundations for Global Engagement in the Digital Age. Cambridge, UK; Medford, MA: Polity, 2019.
17. De Brabandere, Eric, and Isabelle Van Damme. “Good Faith in Treaty Interpretation.” In Good Faith and International Economic Law, edited by Andrew D. Mitchell, M. Sornarajah, and Tania Voon, 37-59. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
18. de Raymond, Jean-François. L’Esprit de la diplomatie: Du particulier à l’universel. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2015.
19. Deeks, Ashley S. “An International Legal Framework for Surveillance.” Virginia Journal of International Law 55 (2015): 291-368.
20. Denza, Eileen. “Diplomatic and Consular Immunities-Trends and Challenges.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law, edited by Tom Ruys, Nicolas Angelet, and Luca Ferro, 433-451. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
21. Denza, Eileen. Diplomatic Law: Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
22. Duquet, Sanderijn. “Immunities of Diplomatic and Consular Personnel - An Overview.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law, edited by Tom Ruys, Nicolas Angelet, and Luca Ferro, 411-432. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
23. Fernández Pasarín, Ana Mar. “Consulates and Consular Diplomacy.” In The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, edited by Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp, 161-70. London: SAGE, 2016.
24. Fletcher, Tom. “Public and Digital Diplomacy.” In Satow’s Diplomatic Practice. 8th ed. Edited by Ivor Roberts, 483-490. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023.
25. Forcese, Craig. “Spies Without Borders: International Law and Intelligence Collection.” Journal of National Security Law & Policy 5 (2011): 179-210.
26. Gardiner, Richard. Treaty Interpretation. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. International Law Commission. Draft Articles on Consular Relations with Commentaries. 1961.
27. International Law Commission. Draft Articles on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities with Commentaries. 1958.
28. Johns, Fleur. “On Consular Internationalism.” Leiden Journal of International Law 38, no. 2 (2025): 60-83.
29. Jones, Peter. “Ethical Dilemmas of Back-Channel Diplomacy: Necessary Secrecy or a Secret Foreign Policy?” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, no. 4 (2018): 483-501. doi:10.1163/1871191X-12341374.
30. Lahmann, Henning. “Information Operations and the Question of Illegitimate Interference under International Law.” Israel Law Review 53, no. 2 (2020): 189-224.
31. Lee, Luke T., and John Quigley. Consular Law and Practice. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
32. Leira, Halvard. “Caring and Carers: Diplomatic Personnel and the Duty of Care.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, no. 2 (2018): 147-166.
33. Lubin, Asaf. “The Liberty to Spy.” Harvard International Law Journal 61, no. 1 (2020): 185-243.
34. Mégret, Frédéric. “From a Human Right to Invoke Consular Assistance in the Host State to a Human Right to Claim Diplomatic Protection from One’s State of Nationality?” In The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights, edited by Andreas von Arnauld, Kerstin von der Decken, and Mart Susi, 453-464. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
35. Melissen, Jan, and Maaike Okano-Heijmans. “Introduction: Diplomacy and the Duty of Care.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, no. 2 (2018): 140-45.
36. Milo, Caterina. “Russian Diplomatic Espionage in Italy: The Biot Affair and International Law.” The Italian Review of International and Comparative Law 1, no. 1 (2021): 171-80.
37. Moulin, Thibault. “The Law of Diplomatic Relations.” In Cyber-Espionage in International Law: Silence Speaks, 182-201. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2026.
38. Munton, Don. “Diplomacy and Intelligence.” In The Encyclopedia of Diplomacy, edited by Gordon Martel, 1-11. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2018. doi:10.1002/9781118885154.dipl0077.
39. Navarrete, Iñaki, and Russell Buchan. “Out of the Legal Wilderness: Peacetime Espionage, International Law and the Existence of Customary Exceptions.” Cornell International Law Journal 51, no. 4 (2019): 910-15.
40. Roberts, Ivor. “Functions of Diplomatic Missions and Consulates.” In Satow’s Diplomatic Practice. 7th ed. Edited by Ivor Roberts, 71-80. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
41. Roberts, Ivor. “Secret or Back-channel Diplomacy, Secret Intelligence, and Religious and Other Unconventional Diplomatic Actors.” In Satow’s Diplomatic Practice. 8th ed. Edited by Ivor Roberts, 499-506. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023.
42. Sen, Biswanath. A Diplomat’s Handbook of International Law and Practice. 3rd rev. ed. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1988.
43. Shi, Xinxiang. “Diplomatic Immunity Ratione Materiae, Immunity Ratione Materiae of State Officials, and State Immunity: A Comparative Analysis.” Leiden Journal of International Law 34, no. 1 (2021): 45-65.
44. Sorel, Jean-Marc, and Valérie Boré Eveno. “1969 Vienna Convention: Article 31 General Rule of Interpretation.” In The Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, edited by Olivier Corten and Pierre Klein, 804-837. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
45. Tsinovoi, Alexei, and Rebecca Adler-Nissen. “Inversion of the ‘Duty of Care’: Diplomacy and the Protection of Citizens Abroad, from Pastoral Care to Neoliberal Governmentality.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, no. 2 (2018): 211-232.
46. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. April 24, 1963. 596 UNTS 261.
47. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. April 18, 1961. 500 UNTS 95.
48. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. May 23, 1969. 1155 UNTS 331.
49. Wouters, Jan, Sanderijn Duquet, and Katrien Meuwissen. “The Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations.” In The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, edited by Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, and Ramesh Thakur, 510-543. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.