Talk:Diplomatic immunity

message: In the table, the 'No' in the last column against Family Members, is ambiguous.  I think what is meant by a 'No' entry is : No Immunity.  However, the ambiguity is that the 'No' entry could also (incorrectly) be taken to mean: No Prosecution.
========================
If a person with diplomatic immunity is in the presence of police, who have verified that the person does have immunity, begins shooting people in the head, the police can do nothing to stop the person?
So, if a person who has been granted diplomatic immunity is in fact doing acts of crime that the "avarage American" would be placed into custody for doing, are they immune to arrest?
Yes, that seems to be the case.  About the contents of the page itself, can anyone provide a rationale for diplomatic immunity?  Perhaps a history of controversial incidents, or a link to a reference covering same?
There should probably be a link/reference to Yvonne Fletcher, the police officer shot by a libyan diplomat. Djbrianuk 14:46, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Miscellaneous topics

message: If a person with diplomatic immunity is in the presence of police, who have verified that the person does have immunity, begins shooting people in the head, the police can do nothing to stop the person?
So, if a person who has been granted diplomatic immunity is in fact doing acts of crime that the "avarage American" would be placed into custody for doing, are they immune to arrest?
Yes, that seems to be the case.  About the contents of the page itself, can anyone provide a rationale for diplomatic immunity?  Perhaps a history of controversial incidents, or a link to a reference covering same?
There should probably be a link/reference to Yvonne Fletcher, the police officer shot by a libyan diplomat. Djbrianuk 14:46, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ============

message: I have remembrances of African diplomats being accused of having young girls from their countries working at their homes as almost-slaves. --Error 00:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Slave maids

message: These immunities also cover some other officers, don't they?
I think that senator-for-life Augusto Pinochet visited Britain with a diplomatic passport. --Error 00:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's totally up to the originating country. In that example, if Chile wants to have Pinochet travel with a diplomatic passport they can. As a senator he has parliamentary immunity so maybe he's entitled to an official (or diplomatic) passport when he travels abroad. Technically, a diplomat should be registered in the state in which he/she is accredited but if one only has an diplomatic passport as a means of identification, the police won't check the official status in the "welcoming" country unless they have serious reasons to do it. Also keep in mind that Pinochet is wanted in many countries, so he might have pulled some strings to get a diplomatic passport so he wasn't arrested while on vacation or whatever he was doing. Bobsky 15:53, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Officers

message: What is the significance of diplomatic immunity in the United States?  Why does it warrant a whole section (about a third of the entire article) to itself?
Maybe because the UN is located there?  Where else is there such a large collection of Diplomats?
:Geneva. Vienna. London. Paris. Brussels. Washington. Perhaps not the same number, but still relatively large, and all  homes to significant UN-system organisations, regional groupings and/or economic/military organisations. Perhaps much higher by percentage of population.--Gregalton 18:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: United States

message: If an immune diplomat murders a close relative of mine and he does not face propoportional prosecution neither here, nor in his home country and so I go after him and take blood revenge on him or hire a hitman to kill him, what would happen to me in different countries? If I am an american, briton or frenchman or japanese, would my home country courts acquit me and porotect me or convict me and extradite me?
Since my country did not act to prosecute murder, which is a crime under natural law, not just human law, the rights which me and every other citizen gave to the country under the social contract now fly back to me and thus I have the right to excercise eye for eye, teeth for teeth under natural law, because that form of original justice has been around long ago before any organized human civilization was established. 195.70.32.136 13:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm... I could feel like that in such a situation. But the argument lacks the principle of proof of guilt. But you exemplify perfectly why immunity might be a bad thing for jurisdiction: the risk for personal vendettas without proper guilt investigation... 83.253.230.181 (talk) 21:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talio 

message: :In modern times, the outbreak of nationalism and egalitarianism has made it difficult for the common man to understand, why some persons should be immune to local jurisdiction. If they are enemy, should they not be interned? If they commit crimes, should they not be prosecuted as everyone else? Such ideas, common though they are, disregard cultural differences and deep distrust between some governments. Would any American, for example, think that an American diplomat in PRC China or in Iran (where U.S. does not currently have standing diplomatic representation) would receive a fair trial if they are charged with say, murder? Most likely, neither would a Chinese communist or an Iranian mullah believe that their diplomats would be fairly tried by an American jury, especially if relations between the countries were undergoing a crisis. With such profound mutual distrust, diplomatic immunity provides a means, albeit imperfect, to safeguard diplomatic personnel.
I think this paragraph could do with a re-wording? -- Blorg 10:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-wording 

message: Would anyone have any info on this? A couple of years ago the son of the Brazilean ambassador drove around Helsinki, drunk, crashed into cars, etc. He was finally "trapped" by two police cars getting in front and behind him, and later expelled from the country. After some time, he returned (with a false ID?) and made even more of a mess. Would anyone happen to have a news source for this, or have more accurate info? I don't want to put it on myself since I might not remember the facts right.
A good example of diplomatic staff seriously breaking the local law would be the scandal in which some staff of the Russian embassy operated a brothel in Helsinki some years ago. I think some of the diplomatic staff were expelled from the country, and would face trial if they returned. AFAIK they were also fired from their jobs in the Russian administration. Anyone got sources on this?--85.49.234.240 23:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abuses: Brazilean ambassador's son in Helsinki/Russia's illegal prostitution services 

message: :Moved from article GreenReaper 23:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversational addition from [[User:193.216.88.208|193.216.88.208]] 

message: The "citation needed" tags on these two points in the "In Popular Culture" section are not needed. Either watching the episode/film in question or even just looking on the entry here is enough to verify the facts.
:Then you could put the episode/movie as the citation. Joeking16 (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Family Guy and Lethal Weapon II

message: If a diplomat rapes someone and then kills them, could they get jailed? Kitia'' 18:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From my understanding, no. What would happen is that the host country (the country the diplomat is in) would request the home country (the country that the diplomat represents) to waive his or her immunity. If the home country agrees to do that, the diplomat would be prosecuted like any normal person. If the home country refuses to do that, the diplomat is still in their jurisdiction and they can choose to prosecute the crime themselves instead, or they can just drop the case. Anyhow, if the immunity of the diplomat was not waived then the diplomat would most likely be declared to be a persona non grata (unwelcome person) by the host country and be expelled, but that is the most that the host country legally can do. --kissekatt 01:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was taught that it depends on the host country on the way they have agreed to treat DI. Though I could likely be wrong. Joeking16 (talk) 20:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Case 

message: Yes we need citation on the U.S Marine Incident who killed the Singer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.27.201.17 (talk) 09:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed

message: I think most of these cases should go. The only relevant ones are those which have some specific relevance or illustrate a point. As far as I can tell, this applies to perhaps one or two of them.--Gregalton 04:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture section is turning into a list 

message: Why is it that almost every piece of information in this article is followed by [citation needed]? Why are so many people editing without providing citations?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ervin2 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just wondering... 

message: Clear vandalism in the first line. Just thought someone should know :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.181.187 (talk) 10:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: I think the references should have their dates and years delinked. usually WP doesnt link within references, and WP also avoids linking trivial events to days of the month or years. there are obvious exceptions, but i think most of these should be delinked. of course, since i have said this, i will at some point attempt to do so myself, but in case anyone else cares...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  format question 

message: Gathering information is not always espionage. If one collects open information (from news broadcasts) or conducts public opinion polls for example, it is not espionage.--Dojarca (talk) 12:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Minor espionages, or gathering information of host countries are conducted in every embassy." 

message: This case is a bit peculiar for a few points, in that the diplomat was subsequently removed from his post, hence has no more immunity protection. He also claimed the embassy car was stolen at teh time of teh accident, although a hearing involving expert witnesses knowledgeable about the anti-theft features of the car said it was highly unlikely based on examination of the car that it had been stolen. Also, the hit-and-run occured while he was still the diplomat. Another complication was that at the time of the accident, the embassy car involved in the accident did not have the country flag attached as it had been removed by the driver, as the car was being used for non diplomatic purposes. Also, the diplomat has since claimed that he was being framed by the government for the accident. Zhanzhao (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silviu Ionescu 

message: This edit caught my eye. On cinsideration, though, it seemed to me that speaking of extradition here didn't make sense. Looking back, I see this June, 2013 edit, where expelled was changed without explanation to extradited. I've changed it back to expelled. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. bobrayner (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  extradited -> expelled 

message: it is very disturbing that the issue of rape is nowhere discussed * this is an international amplification of denial * this is the most underreported crime by several orders of magnitude * when the matter is complicated by age it is even worse * I personally knew a high school girl who had been raped and the rapist daily taunted her in school with his father*s immunity *
there must be some wiggle room in wikirules for taboos so strong no citations are possible * this issue should at least be mentioned * 74.78.15.101 (talk) 18:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: missing category

message: I was wondering why this article doesn't mention the events of 1979? It's one of the most known violations of diplomatic immunity, to the point where the International Court of Justice, an organization that usually is very careful with what it says declared the following in their decision: "It constituted, the Court finds, a clear and serious violation of Iran's obligations to the United States under Articles 22 (2), 24, 25, 26, 27 and 29 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, of Articles 5 and 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and of Article 11 (4) of the 1955 Treaty." http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=334&p1=3&p2=3&case=64&p3=5
205.236.3.71 (talk) 19:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  US embassy in Tehran 

message: Why is this us only --88.104.131.182 (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not. A quick look turned up topical content in the article relative to India, ancient Persia, ancient Rome, a Venezuelan General in Aruba, a Ukrainian domestic worker at the residence of the South African ambassador to Ireland, a Philippine maid who escaped from an embassy of an unidentified Asian country in Finland, the UK, a 1967 incident involving the Burmese Ambassador to Sri Lanka, the Libyan embassy in London, the Japanese Consul-General in Vancouver Canada, a Canadian envoy in Tanzania, the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan  in Pakistan, a Panamanian diplomat  in the Philippines, the Ecuadorian embassy to the UK, an Italian Ambassador to India, a Russian diplomat arrested in The Hague Netherlands and a Malaysian diplomat in New Zealand. I probably missed some other examples. I did tweak the article here to reduce US-centrism at a couple of points, though. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Only 

message: I just deleted the first example under "Other Incidents..." which concerned allegations of diplomatic immunity abuse by the Burmese Ambassador to Sri Lanka (Ceylon) in 1967. The single source is available online but does not verify the allegation.  Another source is inferred in the (now deleted) text to a biography by one-time NZ diplomat Hensley but the text states that later Hensley says his version of events was derived from secondary sources.  This means Hensley's biography might be an Unreliable Source.  The next example of "Other Incidents..." is "a Sudanese delegate to the UN who had been sued for paternity by a night club singer in New York and had had to invoke diplomatic immunity where the reproductive kind had failed."  This (humorous?) anecdote is sourced to Hensley's biography but is not supported by the online reference.  Given that (a) it's a humorous anecdote (b) it's unverifiable by other than Hensley (c) Hensley's account may be unreliable, I've deleted it. Shhhnotsoloud (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 07:02, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gerald Hensley cases 

message: This might be relevant to this page:
http://portugalresident.com/twin-sons-of-portugal%E2%80%99s-iraqi-ambassador-arrested-as-15-year-old-fights-for-life-in-coma
http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/rapaz-em-estado-grave-apos-agressao-em-ponte-de-sor (in portuguese)
http://www.cmjornal.pt/cm-ao-minuto/detalhe/suspeitos-de-agressao-a-jovem-tem-imunidade-diplomatica (in portuguese)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannyps (talk • contribs) 21:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sons of ambassador of Iraq to Portugal assault 15 year old boy, leave him in a coma and needing reconstructive surgery, can't be prosecuted due to diplomatic immunity 

message: Are there any recorded cases of a state proceeding extrajudicially against a foreign diplomat that committed some (severely violent) crime, and that could not be legally prosecuted due to the diplomat's home state refusing to revoke his immunity on request from the hosting state? Say, diplomat from state A, while stationed in state B, murders a citizen of state B, totally unrelated to any diplomatic activity. Then, state B, intent on criminally prosecuting this diplomat, requests from state A that his immunity be rescinded. State A refuses. State B then declares the diplomat persona non grata and expels him, which is the most it can do given that the diplomat still retains his immunity from prosecution. However, as the diplomat prepares to leave state B to return home, he never actually makes it back to his home state. He simply 'disappears' somewhere along the way.
Are there any states which appear to have a policy (obviously unofficial) of using their secret services to proceed in such a manner?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.138.50 (talk) 02:17, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  extrajudicial action against diplomatic criminals 

message: There has been a rather hasty revert by SRich on grounds of neutral language concerning the case of the death of Vitaly Churkin and the continuity of his diplomatic immunity following his death.  Specifically, the supplied RS reference uses the terms to which SRich apparently objects as follows:
"The Law Department agreed and issued a gag order" and “As outlined in formal requests from the United States Department of State, Ambassador Churkin's diplomatic immunity survives his death.”
In both instances, the terms or ideas used, "gag order" and the notion that his immunity remained posthumously are reflected in the language of the RS referenced article.  Therefore, there can be no reasonable basis to find non-neutral use of language in the relevant edit, reverted by SRich.  HervéDuchat (talk) 18:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Incidents 

message: I've removed the following snippet from the Ancient times section and moved it here for discussion:
I'm no expert, and the language of the cited supporting source is a bit obtuse, but I don't read that supporting source as supporting the assertion. Also, I other sources (e.g., , ) seem to disagree. 
As I said, I'm no expert. Please reinsert this removed snippet, with or without changes, or not, as appropriate. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Papal Immunity 

message: I've edited the "Uses and abuses" section, as the UAE diplomat was not arrested for rape, but for solicitation.  No rape (statutory or otherwise) actually occurred in this case.  I've also replaced the Reader's Digest citation (an opinion piece) with a Washington Post citation. 
Of course there may well have been some other case where someone with diplomatic immunity actually raped a child and was released because of said immunity.  If someone can find such a case then "child rape" can be re-added to the list with the appropriate citation. -2003:CA:8732:40DB:B1F9:120D:7E57:48C1 (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solicitation... 

message: Uses and abuses > Vehicular offences > Canadian driver in Tanzania: Can someone check whether the name "Banana district" is accurate? A cursory search of the districts of Tanzania indicates no such place; possible vandalism. Carno237 (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banana district of Tanzania 

message: Noticed a problem with the dates in this paragraph:
"Sacoolas told police she had no immediate plans to leave the country. However, on 13 October US authorities notified the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office of plans to send Sacoolas home, unless serious objections were raised: on 16 October, the UK's Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, went to present objections, a day after the family was sent back."
In fact, according to this link: https://news.sky.com/story/case-of-harry-dunns-alleged-killer-anne-sacoolas-to-be-heard-this-week-at-london-court-12705800 Sacoolas was sent back 19 days after the crash. That would make it in September not October; specifically the new date would be September 15, 2019. So the original source, which no longer exists, was completely wrong. This needs correction because the months should be September not October. Stratfordbaby (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anne Sacoolas section