Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-fxdwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T18:23:29.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sanctions Constraining Diplomatic Representatives to Abide by the Local Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Chesney Hill
Chesney Hill*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although diplomatic representatives enjoy certain immunities in the countries to which they are accredited, they are not free to disregard the laws of the state receiving them. When a diplomatic representative breaks the local law, the ordinary procedure and the usual sanctions cannot always be applied. However, the individual or the state injured by infraction of the law by the diplomatic representative is protected by a number of sanctions and means of applying them. The purpose of this study is to examine their effectiveness.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , April 1931 , pp. 252 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1931

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Attorney-General Palmer, Feb. 5,1919; letter of Secretary of State Charles E. Hughes to Representative Davis, New York Times, Jan. 6,1924; 25 U. S. Treasury Decisions, Internal Revenue, pp. 144-45 (T. D. 3484); text also in Dickinson, E. D., Cases on the Law of Nations (1929), p. 568, n. 18.

2 Fenwick, C. G., International Law (1924), p. 361; Satow, A Guide to Diplomatic Practice (1922), I, p. 252; Von Frisch, Strupp's Wörterbuch des Völkerrechts und der Diplomatic (1922), I, p. 401; G. Jnganni, Die strafrechtlich Exterritorialität der diplomatischen Personen, pp. 38-48; Hurst, Sir Cecil , “ Les immunités diplomatiques ,” 12 Academie de droit international, Recueil (1926), p. 13 Google Scholar; Hershey, , Amos S. Essentials of International Public Law and Organization (1927), p.405;Google Scholar Hyde, C. C., International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the United States, I, pp. 759-760 Google Scholar. Oppenheim, L., International Law, 3rd ed., I, sec. 387, does not believe that it is so well established that the substantive law binds the diplomatic representative, citing Beling, Die strafrechtliche Bedeutung der ExterritoriaUtat (1896), pp. 71-90.Google Scholar

3 Lord Burleigh to L'Aubespine, French Ambassador, who in 1587 endeavored to assassinate Queen Elizabeth, saying that although he escaped the punishment, he was not acquitted from the guilt of the offense, Ward, R. P., The Law of Nations, II, pp. 314-15; Phillimore, Commentaries upon International Law, II, sec. CLXI, pp. 206-7. Decision of Kammergericht of Berlin, June 26, 1899, 29 Clunet (1902), pp. 146-47; 1899 U. S. Foreign Relations, p. 318; Moore, Digest, II, pp. 778-79.

4 Field, Outlines of an International Code, Arts. 109, 153; Foster, J. W., The Practice of Diplomacy (1906), p. 160; Hershey, op. cit., p. 403, n. 32; Satow, loc. dt.; Yon Frisch, op. cit., p. 400.

5 Scott, J. B., Resolutions of the Institute of International Law (1916), p. 120.

6 Hall, International Law, 8th ed., p. 223; Hyde, op. cit., I, p. 760; Cobbett, Leading Cases on Int. Law (1922), I, p. 306; Clunet, E., 14 Clunet (1887), p. 396.

7 Case of Waddington, Satow, I, sec. 298; Sun Yat Sen, 1896; Legation of Pope in France, 1906, 14 Clunet, p. 176. See Ch. de Boeck, “ L'Expulsion et les difficulty internationalei gu'en soulhve la pratique,” 18 Acad, de dr. int., Recueil (1927), pp. 510-17.

8 Post, pp. 265-267.

9 “ Les immunités diplomatiquea,” 12 Acad, de dr. int., Recueil (1926), pp. 209 ff.

10 The Organic Law of the Mexican Diplomatic Corps of June 3, 1896, Art. 44, provides that “ In exceptional cases, in which the seriousness of the offense demands an immediate remedy, the chiefs of the missions can suspend from his functions the diplomatic or consular employee who may be subordinate to them; meanwhile they must without delay send to the Secretary of Foreign Relations an account to justify the action.” Guia Diplomatica Consular, 2d ed., 1902, Ministerio de relaciones exteriores.

11 Post, pp. 260-261.

12 Demangeat, 2 Clunet (1875), p. 91; Slatin, 11 Clunet (1884), p. 339.

13 Genet, Raoul, Traité de Diplomatie et de Droit Diplomatique, tome I, “ L'Agent Diplomatique,” p. 590. (Paris, Pedone, 1931.) This treatise is a careful and detailed analysis of theory and practice, including court decisions.

14 The Organic Law of the Mexican Diplomatic Corps, Art. 43, op. cit., p. 13, provides that the Secretary of Foreign Relations may impose the punishments of written censure and suspension with loss of part or all salary, not exceeding five hundred pesos.

15 A unique institution for dealing with cases involving a person enjoying diplomatic immunity was instituted in Austria-Hungary by a royal act of January 29, 1795, by the creation of a procedure before the Grand Marshal of the Court prior to reference to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Slatin, “ De la juridiction sur les agents diplomatiques,” 11 Clunet (1884), pp. 329-342. The jurisdiction of the Grand Marshal was transferred by law of Feb. 5, 1919 to the ordinary courts. A detailed plan of procedure was made April 30, 1924. Erlass vorn SO April, 1924, Jo U. B., Nr. 14, uber den Recktshilfeverkehr mit dern Ausland, II Teil. Verkehrmit exterritorialm Personen, Arts. 22-28. See Lissbauer, K., Die osterreichischen Strafprozessgesetz nach dern Stande vorn 1 Janner, 1926, 3rd ed., pp. 408-11.

The Code of Criminal Procedure of Estonia contains the following:

Art. 229. Proceedings in respect of crimes or offences committed by persons belonging toforeign embassies and missions shall only be instituted after diplomatic communications with the immediate official superior of the accused.

Art. 230. Crimes and offences committed by persons in the service of ambassadors, envoys and other diplomatic agents shall fall in the ordinary manner within the jurisdiction of the criminal courts, unless special provisions to the contrary exist in treaties concluded with foreign Powers; nevertheless, summonses, whether in connection with the preliminaryenquiries or the final proceedings in the court, shall be transmitted to such persons through the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Answer of Fr. Akel to Questionnaire No. 3, Codification, Publications of the League of Nations, V Legal 1927, Vol. 1, p. 156.

For the procedure in Holland, consult the letter from the Minister of Justice to the Procureurs-General of the Courts, Feb. 3, 1922, in 6 Bulletin de VInstitut Intermidiaire International (1922), pp. 373-74.

16 Genet, op. cit., I, p. 588.

17 Von Frisch, op. p. 401. The English statutes, Acts 11 and 12 Will. Il l, c. 12 and 42 Geo. Il l, c. 85, and the cases arising under them are found in Gibb, A. A., The International Law of Jurisdiction in England and Scotland, p. 278. See also Art. 16 of the German Code of Civil Procedure of Jan. 30, 1877; Art. 27 of the Austrian rule of jurisdiction of Nov. 20,

18 52; Art. 40 of the Brazilian Civil Code; Art. 40 (2) of the Spanish Civil Code. 18 Belgian Judidaire (1893), p. 392; Journal des Tribunaux, Feb. 26,1893; Clunet (1893), pp. 942-43.

19 March 3, 1928, 24 Bulletin de l'lnst. Inter. Int. (Jan. 1931), p. 66; Revue de dr. int. privé, XXV, p. 512.

20 23 this Journal (1929), p. 859; post, p. 260.

21 For example, request of Mexico for recall of the Soviet Ambassador as a consequence of demonstrations of communists before Mexican embassies in two American capitals, Jan. 1930. New York Times, Jan. 24, 25, 1930.

22 A large number of case3 of recall, expulsion and dismissal are not definitely attacks on the state. The following grounds presented by states indicate the fact. England: Bestoujew-Rioumine, Russian Ambassador, publication of memoire recounting the wrongs of the Czar at the hands of England, 1720; M. de Palm, representative of the Emperor, publication of memoire complaining of statements of the English monarch concerning a secret treaty, 1726 (Satow, op. cit., I, secs. 413, 434). France: Conde de Casa Florez, arrest of Spanish revolutionaries in French territory, 1814 (Satow, I, sec. 436); Rakovsky, Soviet Russia, signature of a political manifesto, 1927 (Oppenheim, Int. Law, 4th ed., p. 624, n. 1). Russia: La Chetardie, France, letter speaking of the Czarina in injurious terms, 1744. Spain: Saint Aignan, France, proposal insulting to an officer, 1718; Charles Pinckney, United States, threatening note to the Minister of State (Satow, I, sec. 382); Mr. Bulwer, England, unwanted advice about internal affairs, 1848 (Satow, I, sec. 423). Sweden: Count Rasoumoffsky, Russia, note resented by sovereign as personal insult, 1788 (Satow, I, sec. 435); charge d’affaires of France, whose presence had become “ absolutely useless,” 1812. Lisbon and Portugal: personal conduct of the Nuncio of the Pope disapproved. Peru: Mr. Jewett, United States, lack of courtesy, 1846 (Satow, I, sec. 417). Brazil: Mr. Wise, United States, 1847 (Satow, I, sec. 422). Venezuela: Mr. Russell, United States, statement reflecting on the integrity of Venezuelan officials, 1875; French and Belgian Ministers, defamation of the state, 1895 (Satow, I, sec. 437). Mexico: Mr. Poinsett, United States, 1829; Mr. Cummins, Great Britain, 1924 (Oppenheim, op. cit., p. 647, n. 2). United States: Yrugo, Spain, tampering with the press, 1805; Jackson, England, insinuation of bad faith on the part of the government, 1809; M. Poussin, France, disrespectful communications, 1849; Marcoleta, Nicaragua, violation of confidence and attempt to defeat negotiations, 1852; Cataczy, Russia, abuse of claimants against Russia and attempt to defeat negotiations, 1871; Sackville-West, England, interferencewith the suffrage, and impugning the President and Senate, 1888; Thurston, Hawaii, 1895,furnishing press criticism of American policy in Hawaii; De Lôme, Spain, letter derogatory of the President, 1898 (Moore, Digest, IV, pp. 484, 589).

For the early period see Adair, E. R., The Exterritoriality of Ambassadors in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (1928).

23 England: Leslie, Bishop of Ross, representing Mary, Queen of Scots, 1571; Mendoza, Spain, 1584; L'Aubespine, France, 1587; Inoyosa and Colonna, Spain, 1624; Baron de Bas, France, 1654; Gyllenborg, Sweden, 1717. France: De Zuniga, Spain, 1655; Bruneau, Spain; Cellarmare, Spain, 1718; G. Morris, United States, 1793; Volhine, Soviet Russia, 1925. Venice: Bedmar, Spain, 1618.

24 Moore, Digest, IV, pp. 485-88; 500-501; 533-35.

25 Genet, op. cil., I, p. 595 and n. 957.

26 Ibid., p. 595, n. 958.

27 Ibid., p. 595; American White Book, European War, III, pp. 325-26. For Captain Boy-Ed's defense, see his Verschwörer, Berlin (1920), especially pp. 111-117.

28 Genet, op. cit., p. 595.

29 Calvo, Traité, t. Ill , sec. 1517; Ch. de Boeck, op. cit., p. 570.

30 Ch. de Boeck, op. cit., pp. 510-517.

31 Post, p. 263.

32 Déak, F., 1 So. Calif. Law Rev., pp. 242-243; Fort-Dumanoir, J. de dr. int. privé (1920), p. 831.

33 Art. 14, resolution of Institute of International Law, 1895, in Scott, Resolutions of the Institute of International Law, pp. 122-23; Art. 20, Final Act of the Sixth International Conference of American States, Havana, Feb. 20,1928, in Hudson, M. 0. Cases on International Law (1929), pp. 872-73.Google Scholar

34 Jnganrii, op. cit., p. 42, citing Temme, Archiv fur strafrechtliche Entsheidungen, Bd. I, S. 24.

35 1906 U. S. Foreign Relations, pp. 1448-1456.

36 DeLapradelle et Niboyet, Répertoire de dr. int. (1929), I, p. 358, nos. 207-8. Clunet, 1892, p. 429.

37 Gazette des Tribunaux, C. no. 81; 53 Clunet (1926), pp. 64-65.

38 June 26, 1899. 29 Clunet (1902), pp. 146-47; 1899 U. S. Foreign Relations, p. 318; Moore, Digest, II, pp. 778-79.

39 Op. cit., I, p. 589.

40 Banco de Portugal c. K. Marang van I Jsselveere et cts., 23 Bulletin de I'Inst. Inter. Int. (Oct. 1930), p. 296.

41 54 Jour, du dr. int. privi (1927), p. 1179.

42 Moore, Digest, IV, p. 656.

43 Ibid., p. 656.

44 Ibid., pp. 652-53.

45 Epous P.-Av. plaid, Geneva, July 21, 1927.

46 36 Clunet (1909), pp. 150-51.

47 Satow, op. cit., I, sec. 298.

48 Dickinson v. Del Solar (Mobile and General Insurance Co., Ltd., Third Parties). High Court of Justice, K. B. D. Reported in The Times, London, Aug. 1, 1929; 23 this Journal , (1929), pp. 858-59.

49 Op. cit., p. 212.

50 League of Nations, Bases of Discussion. Publications of the League of Nations. C. 75 M. 69. 1929 V. pp. 82-85.

51 Juristische Wochenschrift (1926), p. 373; 53 Clunet (1926), pp. 460-61.

52 Supra, p. 258.

53 Letter from Governor Albert C. Ritchie to author, dated Jan. 14,1930, enclosing copy of correspondence with Secretary of State dated November 1,1925; reported also New York World, Nov. 4, 1925.

54 The Daily Express, London, quoted in New York Times, Jan. 12, 1928.

55 New York Times, Jan. 10 and 11, 1928.

56 Ibid., May 17, 1928.

57 Ibid., Mar. 10, 1927.

58 Ibid., Mar. 10, 1927.

59 New York Herald-Tribune, Oct. 7, 1929.

60 New York Times, Jan. 12,1928.

61 Ibid., Jan. 11, 1928.

62 New York Times, Jan. 12, 1928.

63 Incident related to author by Mr. Morris, February, 1930.

64 New York Times, Mar. 17, 1929.

65 Ibid., May 17, 1929.

66 Ibid., Aug. 25, 1928.

67 Ibid., Aug. 25, 1928.

68 Letter to the author from the Turkish Ambassador, Jan. 17, 1930.

69 Supra, p. 260.

70 Congressional Record, 71st Cong., 2nd Sess. (Mar. 19, 1930).

71 Ibid.

72 New York Times, Mar. 20, 1930.

73 Congressional Record, 71st Cong., 2nd Sess. (Mar. 19, 1930), p. 5827.

74 Ibid., quoting Washington Post, Mar. 19,1930, Washington Evening Star, Mar. 19,1930.

75 Foster, The Practice of Diplomacy, p. 163.

76 Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 10, 1923; New York Times, Oct. 26, 1923; copy of correspondence supplied to author by former Governor E. F. Morgan, including the following reply to the Secretary of State: “ I would most respectfully suggest that the innocent action of an untutored police is less deserving of admonishment than the willful defiance of speed regulation by such an important personage as an ambassador.”

77 Philadelphia Bulletin, July 15,1924. Arrest near Newark, but State not indicated.

78 Ibid.

79 New York Post, June 18, 1925.

80 New York Post, Oct. 3,1925; no complaint was made to the Governor of New York in this instance. (Letter to author Jan. 15,1930, from Mr. Guernsey T. Cross, secretary to the Governor.)

81 New York Tribune, Nov. 22, 1925.

82 New York Times, Dec. 12, 1926, Jan. 1, Mar. 10, 1927.

83 Ibid., Dec. 31, 1926; Jan. 1, Mar. 10, 1927.

84 New York Times, June 16,1927.

85 Ibid., June 29, 1929.

86 In several of these, the same person was listed twice.

87 Letter to the author from Major and Superintendent Henry G. Pratt, Jan. 17, 1930.

88 Congressional Record, 71st Cong., 1st Sess., p. 3366.

89 New York World, April 26, 1925.

90 Moore, Digest, IV, p. 634.

91 1905 U. S. Foreign Relations, pp. 81-82.

92 New York Times, Sept. 26, 29, Oct. 22, 1921.

93 New York Herald-Tribune, Oct. 7, 1929.

94 New York Times, Oct. 4, 1929.

95 Divorce suit of Viscount Gort, New York Times, June 13, 1925.

96 New York Times, Nov. 10, 1929.