Immunity from Jurisdiction

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
Private Person ◽  
Prior Arrest ◽  
Property B ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction ◽  
Real Action

This chapter examines Article 31.1 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which deals with a diplomatic agent’s immunity from criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. In addition, the agent shall enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction, except in the case of (a) a real action relating to private immovable property; (b) an action relating to succession in which the diplomatic agent is involved as executor, administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and not on behalf of the sending State; and (c) an action relating to any professional or commercial activity outside his official functions. As inviolability was becoming recognised, it would have been unusual for criminal proceedings to take place without prior arrest and detention of the accused. Immunity from civil and administrative jurisdiction, which is less obviously coercive in character, was the next to become established of the basic rules of diplomatic law.

Fun v. Pulgar and Albergrin

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 722-727
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
The Law ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant alleging that she had been trafficked and forced to work by former employers — Certification of diplomatic status of former employers — Whether diplomatic immunity continuing despite subsequent termination of diplomatic status — Whether commercial activity exception applicable to hiring of domestic servant — Whether subsequent attempts at service defective — Whether Court lacking jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Settlement of Disputes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
International Court ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

This chapter considers the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes as discussed in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. As a general rule, disputes over the interpretation or application of the Convention must be resolved speedily by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other authorities of the receiving State in determining whether criminal proceedings may be brought, by national courts when diplomatic immunity is pleaded, or by governments in deciding on whether a member of mission should be recalled or more generally on the level at which they wish to maintain diplomatic relations. According to the protocol, disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention shall lie within the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and may accordingly be brought before the Court by an application made by any party to the dispute being a Party to the present Protocol.

Regina (Charles and Dunn) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

2021 ◽  
Vol 195 ◽  
pp. 662-702
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Technical Staff ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

662Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic correspondence — Exchange of Notes between United States Embassy and United Kingdom’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office — Express waiver of United States Embassy Administrative and Technical staff’s diplomatic immunity from criminal jurisdiction of United Kingdom, in relation to acts performed outside course of duties — Whether express waiver of criminal immunity applying to family members of United States Embassy Administrative and Technical staff — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Whether entitling family members of diplomatic staff to derivative set of privileges and immunities or conferring separate entitlements to inviolability and immunity — The law of England

Montuya v. Chedid and Another

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 714-721
Keyword(s):  
Policy Decision ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Related Case ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant employed at residence of diplomatic agent — Certification of diplomatic status — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Whether outside diplomat’s official function — Immunity limited to acts performed in exercise of official functions — Whether Court lacking jurisdictionTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Commercial activity exception — Scope — Whether Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and related case law relevant in determining scope of exceptionRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Diplomatic Relations Act — Whether Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and related case law relevant in interpreting Vienna Convention — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction over complaintsComity — Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic immunity enhancing relations among nations — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Gonzalez Paredes v. Vila and Nielsen

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 678-688
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Professional Activity ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
Ordinary Meaning ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 31(1)(c) — Action by domestic servant against former employers — Certification of diplomatic status of former employers — Exceptions to immunity — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Weight to be given to Statement of Interest filed by United States — Whether pursuit of academic studies a professional activity under Vienna Convention — Whether fraud recognized as an exception in Vienna Convention — Whether Court lacking jurisdiction — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Intent of signatories — Ordinary meaning of terms in light of object and purpose — Liberal construction — Recourse to history, negotiations and practical construction adopted by parties if meaning unclear — Whether exceptions in Vienna Convention applicable — Whether defendants enjoying diplomatic immunityComity — Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic immunity enhancing relations among nations — Balancing rights of individual against benefits of diplomatic immunity — Policy decision — Whether appropriate for courts to intervene — Whether Court having jurisdiction — The law of the United States

Professional or Commercial Activity by Diplomat

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Prestige

This chapter examines Article 42 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which specifies the professional or commercial activity done by a diplomat. Article 42 states that a diplomatic agent shall not practise for personal profit any professional or commercial activity in the receiving State. The basis of the Article comes from the notion that it would give the sending State assurance that its diplomatic agents abroad would limit their activities to their official duties. It would assist the receiving State by eliminating difficult problems, and would enhance the dignity of the diplomatic corps accredited to its government. Lastly, it would serve to protect diplomatic agents from any suggestion that they might be using the prestige of their office to further their outside interests. In addition, the chapter also describes the relationship between Article 42 and Articles 31.1 (c) which deals with immunity and 34 (d) which tackles taxes on private income.

Reyes v. Al-Malki and Another

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 535-574
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Domestic Servant ◽  
The Law ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Palermo Protocol

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic agents — Immunity from jurisdiction — Object and purpose — Action by domestic servant employed at residence of diplomatic agent — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Article 31(1) — Whether employment of domestic servant a commercial activity — Relationship between Articles 31(1)(c) and 42 — Domestic servant a victim of trafficking — Diplomatic agent leaving position before hearing — Residual immunity under Article 39 — Immunity limited to acts performed in the exercise of official functionsHuman rights — Prohibition of slavery — Trafficking in human beings — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 4 — United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, 2000 (“the Palermo Protocol”) — Whether a norm of jus cogens — Whether overriding diplomatic immunity — Whether provisions of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 to be read in light of the Palermo ProtocolTreaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Articles 31 to 33 — Application to Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Text — Object and purpose — Travaux préparatoires — The law of the United Kingdom

Junior Staff of the Mission and Private Servants

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Technical Staff ◽  
Junior Staff ◽  
Service Staff ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction

This chapter considers Article 37.2 to 37.4 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which highlights the functions of the junior staff of the mission and private servants. Article 37.2 states that members of the administrative and technical staff of the diplomatic mission, together with members of their families, shall enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in Articles 29 to 35, except the immunity from civil and administrative jurisdiction of the receiving State specified in Article 31. They shall also enjoy the privileges specified in Article 36, paragraph 1, in respect of articles imported at the time of first installation. Article 37.3 then states that members of the service staff shall enjoy immunity in respect of acts performed in the course of their duties, exemption from dues and taxes on the emoluments they receive by reason of their employment and the exemption contained in Article 33. Lastly, Article 37.4 states that Private servants be exempt from dues and taxes on the emoluments they receive by reason of their employment.

PENYALAHGUNAAN HAK KEKEBALAN DIPLOMATIK DITINJAU DARI KONVENSI WINA 1961 (STUDI KASUS PENYELUNDUPAN EMAS OLEH PEJABAT DIPLOMATIK KOREA UTARA DI BANGLADESH)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Komang Sukaniasa
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Special Power ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right ◽  
State Representatives

Diplomatic officials are state representatives in developing diplomatic relations with other countries where it is accredited. Diplomatic officials have the rights of immunity and privileges granted by the sending country. Besides enjoying these rights, diplomatic officials also have obligations. As a diplomatic official from North Korea, Son Young Nam is obliged to obey the rules contained in the 1961 Vienna Convention, the 1969 New York Convention, and to respect the national law of the country of Bangladesh which is the country where he was accredited. Son Young Nam's smuggling of gold into Bangladesh was a form of abuse of diplomatic immunity. The act violated Articles 27 and 41 (1) of the 1961 Vienna Convention and Article 25b of The Special Power Act of Bangladesh. Although they have the right to immunity, these rights are not absolute. Immune rights can be breached in the event of gross violations committed by diplomatic officials.

PENERAPAN PRINSIP PERSONA NON GRATA TERHADAP DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENGANIAYAAN TKI OLEH DUTA BESAR ARAB SAUDI DI JERMAN)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document