2009 (8) TMI 771 - HC - Customs

Restrictions prohibiting the export - Export of chemicals - permission from DGFT - Treaty is sought to be implemented in absence of local statute - Held that - What is sought to be implemented is the Export Policy, which is similar to the terms of the Treaty and, therefore, it cannot be said that the Treaty is sought to be implemented in absence of local statute - Appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to restrictions imposed under Exim Policy, enforcement of impugned orders, stay of enforcement pending disposal of petition, interpretation of Export Policy in relation to Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty, reliance on domestic law to bind citizens, validity of licences issued for export and import, mistaken belief in challenging Export Policy.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought relief from the restrictions imposed under the Exim Policy, declaring them ultra vires of the Constitution. The bone of contention was the absence of a local statute in 2003 to give force to the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty, which was implemented in 2005. The advocate argued that the Export Policy was being enforced based on the Treaty terms, but the Court noted that the Export Policy itself is part of the domestic law. The Court found the challenge to be based on a mistaken belief and an attempt to circumvent provisions under the guise of constitutional invalidity.

The Court considered the order dated April 15/20, 2005, which clarified that certain chemicals were exportable only to State Parties to the Convention, with export to non-State Parties prohibited. The petitioners' claim of licences issued by authorities for export and import was refuted, as they failed to provide evidence of permission for export to the specific country in question. The Court emphasized that the petition lacked merit and was dismissed accordingly.