Notice to Embassies, High Commissions and Consulates

[Owen]

The Australian Government has, in accordance with state and commonwealth firearms laws, requested that all weapons which would be deemed to be illegal under state or commonwealth law be surrendered to the Australian Federal Police, if at an Embassy in the ACT, or state law enforcement in the respective states where there may be firearms located at a consulate. A grace period is in place for 48 hours to surrender such firearms, after which time diplomatic status may be revoked if diplomatic staff are found in possession of firearms or firearms are found at the property of diplomatic missions. Australian export and customs law DO NOT allow the export of firearms out of Australia and therefore cannot be returned to their home country, they will be seized by Border Force officers if being exported out of the country. In no way does Australian federal law allow for people to have firearms in their luggage and certainly not on their person when leaving the country.

 

[Zager]

Seeing as those on the Polish Embassy possessed P-64 pistols, the majority would be alright. However, 8 or so guards possessed said 'illegal' firearms. They would not be willing to surrender their weapons, however. Seeing as they were Polish built firearms, Andrzej Duda would politely ask Australian officials to place an exemption on the transport of firearms for the Polish guards.

 

[Owen]

There will be no exemptions, laws cannot simply be bent and exemptions cannot just be given to certain individuals. The Government also has no power to demand that Border Force, Federal Police or other law enforcement agencies not do or do something as Australia is a democracy. The P-64 Pistol is also most certainly illegal as it's a Category H firearm and Polish Embassy staff do not have Australian firearms licenses. The only firearms available in Australia without a license are antique ones made before 1901 and then that only applies in some states. As the Embassy is located in the ACT, federal and territory laws apply.

 

[Zager]

The Polish Embassy would announce a temporary closure. Those armed with the Mini-Beryl would hide their rifles in the Embassy's armory.

 

[Andy]

Russia would announce a temporary close, all personnel and all belongings would leave Australia via Russian Charted Aircraft flying as Diplomatic Aircraft.

 

[John]

The US Embassy staff would refuse to surrender any weapons deemed "illegal" by the Australian Government, giving that the Embassy is US Sovereign Territory.

 

[Zager]

Those stranded at the Embassy would inform the Russians to wait for them, while they pack up and leave.

 

[Owen]

The Australian Federal Police would notice the Russian staff leaving in cars. They would be alerted that they are possibly smuggling weapons. Upon exiting the Embassy, the Federal Police have the power to make sure they are fully complying with Australian law. A patrol car would go behind the Russian cars and turn on its lights and sirens down Canberra Avenue (towards the Airport), to signal to them to pull over. The cars would also not be allowed to enter Canberra Airport from any point as they are all secured entry points and there are strict laws governing who can enter an Airport (for obvious reasons). The Russian aircraft would have permission to land from Canberra tower though.

 

[Owen]

The U.S. would be told there are simply no laws anywhere that say that is U.S. sovereign territory, most important of which is certainly not recognised as such by Australian law governing embassies, the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Act 1967. The U.S. Embassy would be asked to rethink its current hostility towards Australian law enforcement.

 

[Baophan122]

The Austrian government issues a diplomatic objection to this, seeing this as a threat to the safety of our embassy, we know that Australia is one of the more safe place in the world, however we should be able to manage security matters of our very own embassy, we request the Australian to grant us special permits to possess firearms or will cut all ties and withdraw our diplomats within 48 hours

 

[Owen]

The Australian Federal Police has guaranteed that all embassies will be closely monitored by the AFP and AFP patrols are regular in the embassy district around Yarralumla and South Canberra. Unarmed security guards are also allowed to be employed at the embassy if they so wish and can still be armed with more legal types of weapons such as capsicum spray which is allowed to be possessed by authorised security guards, which if the embassy wished to provide security guards from their home country, their accreditation would be valid in Australia and they would have the right to carry capsicum spray. The Australian Government cannot give special permits to possess firearms and that if they wish to possess certain categories of firearms they will have to go through the normal processes with the ACT Government, who are the ones responsible for firearms licenses in the territory.

 

[Andy]

The Russian Car would make a stop outside of the Polish Embassy awaiting for the Polish Delegation to enter. One of the drivers would get out unarmed looking to the Australian Police.

 

[CampinKiller]

Guards in the Colombian embassy would simply be ordered to not leave the grounds of the embassy with their firearms, as the Australian government could not enter the facility without the express permission of the Colombian government. Otherwise, they would be in violation of the Vienna Convention of 1961.

 

[Zager]

Piotr Buszta, the head operator of the Embassy, would order three of his guards into the car, and also his child. 6 year-old Jakub. He would sigh.

"What in God's name is going on?"

 

[JJSmithJr]

Nigeria would note that it is currently and has always been in cooperation with this policy in Australia.

 

[Naio90]

Although the Argentine Republic does not currently posses any firearms in its EMbassy in Canberra, it would release a statement indicating that the Australian Government is violating the Convention on International Relations, passed by the General Assambly.

Specifically, and among others, it is breaching Chapter 2, Art 2 point III (The "Premises of the Mission", Furnishings, Property and Transport of the mission shall be immune from Search, Requisition, Attachment or Execution") and Chapter 2 Art 3 Point IV (A "Diplomatic Agent" shall enjoy immunity from the Criminal Jurisdiction of the Receiving State. He shall also enjoy immunity from its Civil and Administrative Jurisdiction.)

Finally, it would comment on one of the australian statements indicating that the concept of something being "more legal" than other does not exist. There is only Legal or Ilegal.

 

[Jamie]

To avoid tension, the British Government would announce it's intention to exclude the holding of firearms at the Embassies and Consulates in Australia. However, have urged the Australian Government to reconsider the requirement and comply with the Global Assembly Convention on International Relations, but nonetheless, Britain would adapt to the current situation.

 

[Bruno]

In order to not create a bigger problem with the Australian Government, even if by international law, the ground of a embassy are part of the jurisdiction of the Nation leading that Diplomatic mission, the Portuguese Embassies would dismantle its weapons by parts, which would be rendered useless, and give them to Australian Authorities.

The Portuguese Minister of Foreign Affairs, as however issued a statement, that disallowing embassies to carry weapons,which are only used by Trained Personnel, is a high risk. And as urged the Australian Government to retract this decision.

 

[Baophan122]

The Austrian government would destroy all weapons in the embassy for now but strongly advise the Australian government to take necessary moves in respect of diplomatic immunity abd international laws.

 

[IrgunRevisionist]

The Rhodesian Government would announce its refusal to comply with the required disarmourment of Rhodesian diplomatic institutions in Australia declaring such move on the part of Australia to be a breach of commonwealth tradition permitting individuals to take up arms in defense of their liberties.