The party seeking to challenge diplomatic immunity may question whether the role taken up by the individual asserting the immunity is just a “sham”, merely intended for the avoidance of prosecution. Claimants will argue that a diplomatic position is merely a device to prevent the successful prosecution of legal proceedings. As is often the case, the law seeks to balance competing rights and protections.Ī regular counter to defendants who rely on their diplomatic status to secure immunity from prosecution is for the other party to claim that the diplomatic position is not genuine. There have been a number of cases in English law in which the compatibility of immunity with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (right to a fair trial) has been considered. Diplomatic immunity may also extend to the diplomat’s family members. Under the 1961 Vienna Convention, foreign diplomats are generally afforded immunity from prosecution in their host country in both criminal and civil proceedings. International approach to diplomatic immunity However, for both claimants and defendants in English legal proceedings, the status and effect of an individual’s diplomatic immunity can have wide-ranging implications for the litigation in such proceedings.
Bar a highly unlikely political intervention by the Saudi state, the perpetrators of Khashoggi’s murder will almost certainly never see the inside of a Turkish court room. Recent high-profile news stories about the bankruptcy proceedings against Boris Becker and the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul have brought the status of diplomatic immunity into focus.