The Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Diplomatic Service - Essay Example

? At face value it might appear as if the law governing the diplomatic services of Azerbaijan United Are quite similar, a further analysis reveals the fact that noted dissimilarities exist between the two. As a function of underlining these differentials and expounding upon the, the following analysis will seek to analyze both legal codes and elaborate upon the differentials that are inherent within them. Although it is impossible to create an expansive and nuanced comparison within a short four pages of text, the following analysis will attempt, with all due diligence, to encapsulate a discussion of the larger differentials that exists between the code of laws that govern the diplomatic service in both of these unique and distinct regions of the globe. In this way, the major areas that will be discussed between these two code of laws revolve around the expectation of impartiality, receiving of gifts or other remunerations, the level to which the monitoring and/or implementation of successful agreements is performed, whether or not discrimination is a determinant compliments that requires elaboration and definition, the process and regulations regarding the acceptance of gifts, and the level and extent to which the sponsoring state is ultimately responsible for providing the needs and welfare of the employed individuals within the diplomatic services. One of the first and most blatant the differentials that is noted with regards to the law concerning the diplomatic services between Azerbaijan and the United Kingdom is with respect to the overall level of importance and time that the United Kingdom’s code of law gives towards the importance of impartiality. For instance, the United Kingdom specifies the following in DSR one section 3: “As a civil servant, you are appointed on merit on the basis of fair and open competition and are expected to carry out your role with dedication and a commitment to the Diplomatic Service and its core values: integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality” (Diplomatic Service Regulations, 2012, p. 5). Further section 3 of DSR 1 goes on to state that impartiality is defined as “ acting solely according to the merits of the case and serving equally well Governments of different political persuasions (Ibid). Although there is not a specific section within the law governing the actions and expectations of the diplomatic service operating at the behest of Azerbaijan, article 4 subsection to denotes the following with regards to the expectation concerning proper behavior of diplomatic professionals: “Diplomatic service agencies may carry out other functions in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan” (Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan, 2012, p. 2). Once again, a clear level of divergence is noted with respect to the fact that the laws governing diplomatic expectations within Azerbaijan deviate quite a bit from the law governing diplomatic expectations within the United Kingdom. Serving based upon impartiality is a fundamental construct of the UK law whereas serving in strict adherence and accordance with existing Azeri law and the Constitution serves as the regulatory framework and concern for the Azeri consular services. Another noted differential is with regards to the level and extent to which British law defines appropriate behavior and expected outcomes is with regards to what the regulations specific concerning appropriate remuneration and/or the acceptance/receipt of gifts. Whereas the British law allows for the receipt and acceptance of certain low monetary value gifts, special favors, discounts, or benefits of any other variety are strictly prohibited from being enjoyed by the individual employed by the diplomatic services. Although this is not to say that the receipt of gifts and or any level of persuasion/coercion on the part of a third-party is not specifically frowned upon within the regulations of consular and diplomatic conduct that had been laid out within the aforementioned case, no such specification of regulations pertaining to the receipt of privileges is alluded to within the law/regulations of Azerbaijan. As such, no discussion of the receipt of gifts, giving of bribes, or preferential treatment in order to affect a given goal is discussed within the law constraining consular or diplomatic activities for the nation of Azerbaijan. Thus far, this analysis has been concentric upon discussing the levels of differentiation that as the area of all as with regards to the law of the United Kingdom. However, a noted exception exists with regards to article 4 section 1 subsection 12. As such, as very law denotes that one of the core activities that is expected of an individual employed within the consular and/or diplomatic services is to “monitor the implementation of the international agreements joined by the Republic of Azerbaijan” (Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan, 2012, p. 3). As stated, the British law has no such structural demand. Whereas knowledge of international agreements and seeking to promote the United Kingdom’s interests, in an ethical manner, as a core component of the British regulations, no such requirement is denoted in the actual law. Another key differential that exists is with respect to the fact that the United Kingdom’s code of regulations and spends a great deal of time discussing the importance of nondiscrimination and equal opportunity awareness. Due to the fact that United Kingdom has a long history of colonial empire, it is not surprising that the nations comprising the kingdom necessarily represent a high degree of diversity. Although diversely is priced in Azerbaijan as well as such a history is not exist for the as very peoples and the need for a discussion and specific regulation concerning equal opportunity and or antidiscrimination process is not evident within the regulations. Likewise, the United Kingdom’s regulations concerning diplomatic activity provide an in-depth discussion with regards to what expectations exist where the state with regards to providing for the health, safety, and security of the employee. Once again, this marks a noted deviation and differential between the laws and regulations lain out for Azerbaijan. The most likely reason for such a differential has to do with the fact that the nation of Azerbaijan merely incorporates any and all information concerning the health, safety, and quality of life of the employee to the employment contract and/or other regulatory sections of the law. Rather than did noting that this merely does not exist within Azerbaijan, the reader would do well to note that similar reflexive statements, as compared to the United Kingdom, merely exist elsewhere. References N.A., 2012. Diplomatic Service Regulations for the United Kingdom. 1-31. N.A., 2012. Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan. 1-14. Read More