The field of international human rights has been one of the most prominent and dynamic areas of public international law in recent decades. At the same time the law of state immunity, albeit less prominent, has also been subjected to a process of dynamic change. The principle of absolute immunity of states from the adjudicatory jurisdiction of foreign states has been replaced by a restrictive concept under which foreign states can be sued under certain circumstances. The violation of fundamental human rights by foreign states is, however, still widely regarded as immunity- protected conduct, be it because such violations must be considered as governmental acts (acta jure imperii) or because the violations were committed outside the territory of the foreign state. Consequently, it is often impossible for the victim of such violations to bring damage proceedings against the foreign state based on municipal (tort) law in a municipal court. The present study attempts to demonstrate that international law does not per se demand that foreign states be granted immunity in such cases. The current state of international immunity law as evidenced by state practice and the work of several international learned bodies is surveyed extensively. It is shown that the granting of immunity may contradict the procedural guarantees of the European Convention of Human Rights. The impact of human rights law on the traditional concept of diplomatic protection is described. The study concludes that a further restriction of the immunity privilege is necessary, and criteria are offered to distinguish between violations of human rights which should remain immunity-protected and violations where the interest of the perpetrating state to remain immune from foreign jurisdiction must yield to the interest of the injured individual to obtain adequate redress.

Xiaodong Yang examines the issue of jurisdictional immunities of States and their property in foreign domestic courts.

The doctrine of state immunity bars a national court from adjudicating or enforcing claims against foreign states. This doctrine, the foundation for high-profile national and international decisions such as those in the Pinochet case and the Arrest Warrant cases, has always been controversial. The reasons for the controversy are many and varied. Some argue that state immunity paves the way for state violations of human rights. Others argue that the customary basis for the doctrine is not a sufficient basis for regulation and that codification is the way forward. Furthermore, it can be argued that even when judgments are made in national courts against other states, the doctrine makes enforcement of these decisions impossible. This fully restructured new edition provides a detailed analysis of these issues in a more clear and accessible manner. It provides a nuanced assessment of the development of the doctrine of state immunity, including a general comprehensive overview of the plea of immunity of a foreign state, its characteristics, and its operation as a bar to proceedings in national courts of another state. It includes a coherent history and justification of the plea of state immunity, demonstrating its development from the absolute to the restrictive phase, arguing that state immunity can now be seen to be developing into a third phase which uses immunity allocate adjudicative and enforcement jurisdictions between the foreign and the territorial states. The United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of states and their Property is thoroughly assessed. Through a detailed examination of the sources of law and of English and US case law, and a comparative analysis of other types of immunity, the authors explore both the law as it stands, and what it could and should be in years to come.

The open access book examines the consequences of the Italian Constitutional Court’s Judgment 238/2014 which denied the German Republic’s immunity from civil jurisdiction over claims to reparations for Nazi crimes committed during World War II. This landmark decision created a range of currently unresolved legal problems and controversies which continue to burden the political and diplomatic relationship between Germany and Italy. The judgment has wide repercussions for core concepts of international law and for the relationship between different legal orders. The book’s three interlinked legal themes are state immunity, reparation for serious human rights violations and war crimes (including historical ones), and the interaction between international and domestic institutions, notably courts. Besides a meticulous legal analysis of these themes from the perspectives of international law, European law, and domestic law, the book contributes to the civic debate on the issue of war crimes and reparation for the victims of armed conflict. It proposes concrete legal and political solutions to the parties involved for overcoming the present paralysis with a view to a sustainable interstate conflict solution and helps judges directly involved in the pending post-Sentenza reparation cases. After an Introduction (Part I), Part II, Immunity, investigates core international law concepts such as those of pre/post-judgment immunity and international state responsibility. Part III, Remedies, examines the tension between state immunity and the right to remedy and suggests original schemes for solving the conundrum under international law. Part IV adds European Perspectives by showcasing relevant regional examples of legal cooperation and judicial dialogue. Part V, Courts, addresses questions on the role of judges in the areas of immunity and human rights at both the national and international level. Part VI, Negotiations, suggests concrete ways out of the impasse with a forward-looking aspiration. In Part VII, The Past and Future of Remedies, a sitting judge in the Court that decided Sentenza 238/2014 adds some critical reflections on the Judgment. Joseph H. H. Weiler’s Dialogical Epilogue concludes the volume by placing the main findings of the book in a wider European and international law perspective.

The author shows through a careful analysis of the law that restrictive immunity does not have vox populi in developing countries, and that it lacks usus. He also argues that forum law, i.e. the lex fori is a creature of sovereignty and between equals before the law, only what is understood and acknowledged as law among states must be applied in as much as the international legal system is horizontal.

This volume analyses the legal grounds, premises and extent of pecuniary compensation for violations of human rights in national legal systems. The scope of comparison includes liability regimes in general and in detail, the correlation between pecuniary remedies available under international law and under domestic law, and special (alternative) compensation systems. All sources of human rights violations are embraced, including historical injustices and systematical and gross violations. The book is a collection of nineteen contributions written by public international law, international human rights and private law experts, covering fifteen European jurisdictions (including Central and Eastern Europe), the United States, Israel and EU law. The contributions, initially prepared for the 19th International Congress of Comparative law in Vienna (2014), present the latest developments in legislation, scholarship and case-law concerning domestic causes of action in cases of human rights abuses. The book concludes with a comparative report which assesses the developments in tort law and public liability law, the role of the constitutionalisation of the right to damages as well as the court practice related to the process of enforcement of human rights through monetary remedies. This country-by-country comparison allows to consider whether the value of protection of human rights as expressed in international treaties, ius cogens and in national constitutional laws justifies the conclusion that the interests at stake should enjoy protection under the existing civil liability rules, or that a new cause of action, or even a whole new set of rules, should be created in national systems.

The law of immunity of states, of international organisations, and of public officials is one of the most important and most controversial topics of international law. The book consists of five parts: ‘State Immunity – National Practice’; State Immunity before the ICJ – The case Germany v Italy; ‘Commercial Activities and State Immunity’; ‘Immunity and Impunity’; and ‘Immunities of International Organisations’. Although immunities are in principle firmly anchored in international law, their precise legal implications are often unclear. The book takes up a number of new trends and challenges in this field and assesses them within the framework of global constitutionalism and multilevel governance. Contains chapters in both English and French.