A comprehensive and in-depth study of the legal position in international law of heads of state, heads of government and other senior state officials, this book analyses relevant treaties, case law, and custom to set out the law in this area and provide practical guidance.

This book offers a unique critical analysis of the legal nature, effects and limits of UN Security Council referrals to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Alexandre Skander Galand provides, for the first time, a full picture of two competing understandings of the nature of the Security Council referrals to the ICC, and their respective normative interplay with legal barriers to the exercise of universal prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction. The book shows that the application of the Rome Statute through a Security Council referral is inherently limited by the UN Charter as well as the Rome Statute, and can conflict with other branches of international law, including international human rights law, the law on immunities and the law of treaties. Hence, it spells out a conception of the nature and effects of Security Council referrals that responds to these limits and, in turn, informs the reader on the nature of the ICC itself.

The Oxford ILDC online database, an online collection of domestic court decisions which apply international law, has been providing scholars with insights for many years. This ILDC Casebook is the perfect companion, introducing key court decisions with brief introductory and connecting texts. An ideal text for practitioners, judged, government officials, as well as for students on international law courses, the ILDC Casebook explains the theories and doctrines underlying the use by domestic courts of international law, and illustrates the key importance of domestic courts in the development of international law.

The legal position in international law of heads of states and other senior state representatives is at the heart of the conflict thrown up by recent changes in the international legal order. The establishment of the International Criminal Court and the ad hoc criminal tribunals reflects a growing belief that heads of states and other senior state representatives should be held accountable for serious violations of international law. It is now questioned whether foreign states and their officials still have immunity from proceedings concerning grave human rights abuses in national courts. This book provides a comprehensive treatment of this key issue, covering both civil and criminal proceedings before domestic courts and the position before international courts and tribunals. The positions of both serving and former heads of states are examined and, where appropriate, so is that of their family members. The wide variety of constitutional forms and titles enjoyed by heads of states and senior state representatives is considered and their internationally relevant powers and functions outlined. The implications of recognition or lack of it are assessed, together with the practical and legal consequences of loss of office and/or exile in a foreign state. In examining the position of heads of state and other senior representatives in foreign states, attention is given to the question of immunities before the local courts, and to other privileges, protections, and courtesies to which they may be entitled. The book draws a distinction between the personal immunity (ratione personae) enjoyed by heads of states which derive from their status or office, and the official act immunity (ratione materiae) enjoyed by all state officials. It closely examines the relationship between state immunity as it has developed under the restrictive doctrine and the immunities to which individuals are entitled. Careful consideration is given to separate regimes of international immunities such as special missions.This systematic analysis of the legal position of heads of states takes into account the history of the subject, relevant state practice (judicial and legislative), the impact of relevant international treaties, and international judicial or arbitral decisions on the matter.

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

Explores how the first treaty-based UN international tribunal's judges innovatively applied the law to perpetrators of international crimes in one of the worst conflicts in recent history.

The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations has for over 50 years been central to diplomacy and applied to all forms of relations among sovereign States. Participation is almost universal. The rules giving special protection to ambassadors are the oldest established in international law and the Convention is respected almost everywhere. But understanding it as a living instrument requires knowledge of its background in customary international law, of the negotiating history which clarifies many of its terms and the subsequent practice of states and decisions of national courts which have resolved other ambiguities. Diplomatic Law provides this in-depth Commentary. The book is an essential guide to changing methods of modern diplomacy and shows how challenges to its regime of special protection for embassies and diplomats have been met and resolved. It is used by ministries of foreign affairs and cited by domestic courts world-wide. The book analyzes the reasons for the widespread observance of the Convention rules and why in the special case of communications - where there is flagrant violation of their special status - these reasons do not apply. It describes how abuse has been controlled and how the immunities in the Convention have survived onslaught by those claiming that they should give way to conflicting entitlements to access to justice and the desire to punish violators of human rights. It describes how the duty of diplomats not to interfere in the internal affairs of the host State is being narrowed in the face of the communal international responsibility to monitor and uphold human rights.