It seems bizarre to me that a person with diplomatic immunity could commit a crime, even kill someone in the U.S. and not be prosecuted.
In: Other
No, the idea is that they get sent back to their home country to be tried there. They can’t just do whatever they want and get away with it.
Diplomatic immunity is a principle under international law that says that, for the most part, diplomats cannot be arrested or prosecuted for crimes they commit while working in other countries. Exactly who gets diplomatic immunity and how much immunity they get is governed by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Immunity, which has been signed by all but 2 UN recognized countries. Generally speaking, diplomats and their immediate families get immunity. Ambassadors get the highest level, while consular officers and other diplomatic staff get some lesser level of immunity.
The idea is that diplomats need to be free from possible reprisal to be able to do their jobs. For example, 2 countries that are hostile to each other or even at war with each other need to know that their diplomats are safe in the other country in order for diplomacy to happen. Otherwise, you could wind up a situation where one country arrests another country’s diplomat as diplomatic play, which could result in tit-for-tat spiraling into a crisis.
Diplomatic immunity is not absolute. It can be waived by the diplomat’s home country. Your example of a diplomat killing someone and not being prosecuted is rather extreme. In that case, and in any case where a diplomat is accused of a particularly egregious crime, it’s globally expected that the diplomat’s home country would waive immunity which would allow the diplomat to be arrested and prosecuted like anyone else, and it’s happened before. The diplomat can also be expelled from their host country and arrested and prosecuted back home.
Diplomatic immunity exists because if a country starts arresting diplomats, even for a good reason, then *their* diplomats might get arrested. It’s easier for everyone to just agree not to arrest anyone else’s diplomats.
It is a wild thing overall. It’s an agreement between all countries. You can’t kill anyone. But you can avoid parking tickets. Basically, diplomats started out as one thing and it has morphed into what it is now. I can tell you that diplo status is obviously for embassy/consulate staff. Then it gets a little harrier. CIA will be assigned state department roles under the guise of something ambiguous like “Human resources” or “IT” to get the black passport so they can get out if needed
Just to say, what you think might happen, does happen. Most notably recently an American woman who was married to a US diplomat killed a British lad over here by driving wrecklessly. She ran back to the US and has faced no legal repercussions for her actions because the US government doesn’t want her to. All the other comments saying that countries cooperate or that you can’t commit serious crimes… are wrong. The real answer is it depends on where you’re from. The US can strong arm other countries and ignore their requests, but if an embassador from Brazil or something killed an American you bet they’d be consequences.
Diplomatic immunity isn’t some new fangled idea, it has existed for basically as long as governments and countries. Almost all societies since ancient times agree that killing or detaining an envoy or messenger sent from another country is a stupid move, it encourages the other country to detain or kill their own envoys, and generally prevents any kind of meaningful diplomacy if your messages can’t even get through.
The idea is not that diplomats are allowed to commit crimes or murder people with no consequences, its that they won’t be arrested based on some arbitrary law the host country has, so they can actually do their job. If you send a diplomat to a foreign country, and they’re sitting in jail because they got arrested, then it kind of defeats the whole point of sending a diplomat.
Latest Answers