Extent of Functional Immunity Granted to State Officials

  • Ayush Tiwari Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow, India
Keywords: Diplomatic protection, functional immunity, personal immunity, state sovereignty, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Protection, 1961

Abstract

Being a part of the international community has greatly altered the relations between different states. This article will focus on the concept of diplomatic immunity, and, specifically, functional immunity provided to state officials in the realm of international law. A thorough insight into the Vienna Convention regarding Diplomatic Immunity has furthered the scope of present research. Furthermore, a line of distinction is drawn between personal and functional Immunity. This paper will also take a look into the assumptions relating to functional immunity within international law and also evaluate its doctrinal approaches. Additionally, the legal ambit of the official Act, the importance for states to recognize functional immunity is also discussed. This article will not only talk about provisions established in law but also the customs which are adopted in relation to the functioning of rationemateriae. The possibility of weighing functional immunity alongside the states’ civil and criminal jurisdiction is also evaluated in the concluding part.

References

1. CLAUDIA H. DULMAGE, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY: IMPLEMENTING THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS, 806 (10th edn, case W. Res. J. Int’l L, 1978).
2. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, April 18, 1961, 500 UNTS 95.
3. Ibid.
4. EILEEN DENZA, VIENNA CONVENTION ON DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS (3rd edn., United Nation Audiovisual library of International Law 1, 2009).
5. United Nation Treaty Collection, Treaty section, United Nation Treaty Convention on Diplomacy, (accessed 01.08.2017).
6. MALCOLM N. SHAW, INTERNATIONAL LAW, 506 (7rd edn, Cambridge University Press, 2014).
7. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, April 18, 1961, article 9.
8. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran Case (United States of America v Iran) ICJ Rep. 3(1980).
9. SIR ARTHUR WATTS, ‘THE LEGAL POSITION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW OF HEADS OF STATES, HEADS OF GOVERNMENTS AND FOREIGN MINISTERS’ , 13, 247 (Recueil des Cours, 1994-III).
10. United States v Noriega, 117 F 3d 1206 (11th Cir. 1997, Supreme Court of USA). US government never recognized General Noriega (de facto ruler of Panama) as head of state.
11. TOMONORI, ‘THE INDIVIDUAL AS BENEFICIARY OF STATE IMMUNITY: PROBLEMS OF THE ATTRIBUTION OF ULTRA VIRES CONDUCT’, 261 (Denver J Int’l L and Policy, 2001).
12. Zoernsch v. Waldock 1 WLR 675, at 692 (1964).
13. Hazel fox, The law of state immunity, 353 (3rdedn, oxford international press, 2002).
14. France-New Zealand Arbitration Tribunal, (1990) I.L.R.500 82.
15. Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980).
16. ‘Abu Omar’ case, General Prosecutor at the Court of Appeals of Milan v Adler and ors.ILDC 1960 (IT 2012) (Supreme Court of cassation, 2012).
17. Accountability in Foreign Courts for State Officials’ Serious Illegal Acts: When Do Immunities Apply?, December 2016 International Justice and Human Rights Clinic, The University of British Columbia.
18. C. C. HYDE, INTERNATIONAL LAW CHIEFLY AS INTERPRETED AND APPLIED BY THE UNITED STATES,821(Little, Brown & Co. 1945-I).
19. LORNA MCGREGOR, IMMUNITY V ACCOUNTABILITY: CONSIDERING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STATE IMMUNITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TORTURE AND OTHER SERIOUS INTERNATIONAL CRIMES (Redress, 2005).
20. Report of the International Law Commission, 69th Session, 2017.
21. McElhinney v Ireland 123 ILR 73 (2001) (European Court of Human Rights).
22. Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, Djibouti v France, ICJ Rep 177 (2008).
23. Arrest Warrant case, Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium, ICJ Rep 75 (2002).
24. Jones and Others v United Kingdom, 53 ILM 540 (2014) (European Court of Human Rights).
25. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, Germany v Italy, ICJ Rep 99 (2012) (Judge Cangado Trindade).
26. The Schooner Exchange v McFadden, 11 US 116, 135 (1812), (Supreme Court of United States, Marshall CJ).
27. Fenton Textile Association Limited v Krassin, 1 Annual Digest Rep Public Intl L Cases 295-298 (1922).
28. Samantar v Yousuf and ors. ,147 ILR 726 ff (2012).
29. State Immunity Act of the United Kingdom 1978, State Immunity Act of Canada 1985.
30. CEDRIC RYNGAERT, JONES V UNITED KINGDOM: THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS RESTRICTS INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TORTURE, 47-50 (30th edn, Utrecht Journal of International and European Law 30, 2014).
31. Waite and Kennedy v Germany, 118 ILR 121 (1999).
32. Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, Application no. 25965/04, Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights, 7 January (2010).
33. Inre Von Lewinski,vol. 16 Annual Digest Rep Public Intl L Cases 509 ff (1949).
34. Arrest Warrant case, Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium, ICJ Rep 75 (2002).
35. Prosecutor v Blaskic, Case No IT-95-14-AR108, 29 October, (1997), (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Appeals Chamber).
36. Arrest Warrant case (Democratic Republic of the Congo v Belgium), ICJ Rep 3, [61] (2002).
37. Questions relating to the obligation to prosecute or extradite (Belgium v Senegal), ICJ Rep 422 (2012).
38. Convention against Torture and other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, 1984.
39. Jurisdictional immunities of the State (Germany v Italy), [2012] ICJ Rep 99.
40. Attorney-General of the Government of Israel v Adolf Eichmann, [1968] 36 ILR 277-342, specially 308-312.
41. Kovtunenko v U Law Yone, [1960] 31 ILR 259 ff.
42. Emmanuel Gaillard and Isabelle Pingel-Lenuzza, International Organizations and Immunity from Jurisdiction: To Restrict or to Bypass, 51 (ICLQ, 2002).
43. Dupree Associates Inc. v. OAS, [1982] 63 ILR 92.
44. Cynthia Brazak and Nasr Ishak v. the UN et al., 551 F.Supp.2d 313 (2008 U.S. District Court).
45. International Organizations Immunities Act 1945, 22 U.S.C. §288a (“IOIA”).
46. Jiminez v U.S. District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972, Supreme Court of United States).
47. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, April 18, 1961, art. 38, art. 39(2), 500 UNTS 95.
48. Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, Ex Parte Pinochet Ugarte (‘Pinochet III’) [1999] 119 ILM 136 ff.
49. Convention on Special Missions, Arts. 24-31, December 8, 1969, 1400 UNTS 231.
50. Khurts Bat v Investigating Judge of the Federal Court of Germany, [2011] EWHC 2029 (Admin) and (2012) 3 Weekly L Rep 180.
51. G P Barton, ‘Foreign Armed Forces: Immunity from Criminal Jurisdiction’, 186-234 (31 edn, British YB Intl L, 1950); H Fox, The Law of State Immunity, 717 (2nd edn, OUP, 2008).
52. Latorre and others v Union of India and Others, (2012) 252 KLR 794.
53. G.P. Barton, Foreign armed forces: Immunity from criminal jurisdiction, 186, 192-93 (27 edn, Brit, Y.B. INT’L L, 1950).
54. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, April 4, 1951.
55. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, April 22, 1963, art. 43, 596 U.N.T.S. 261.
56. Bigelow v. Zizianoff, [1932] 4 I.L.R. 384.
57. Proc. Gen. Appello Milano, Sez v Penale: Nasr Osama Mustafá Hassan detto Abu Omar e altri, [2013] 96 Rivista di dirittointernazionale 272 ff.
58. In re Rissmann [1994] 71 I.L.R. 577.
Published
2019-01-01