Looks like the Saudi prince in this case did not have diplomatic immunity. It makes me wonder how many criminal/sexual abuse cases go unprocecuted in the U.S. (And across the world) ?
So, although the crime or accused is not prosecuted, is the crime totally wiped off or is there a record that such an such crime was alleged but not prosecuted due to diplomatic immunity ? I would start with the U.S. but welcome statistics from other countries.
One of my relatives had a gig with diplomatic immunity for a few years near Washington. I don’t know about other countries, but he got the whole stern talking-to thing - If there is any hint that you or anyone in your family is a problem that could create an international incident. that phase of your career will end and you (and family) will be summoned back to Ottawa. IIRC the country has the option of waiving diplomatic immunity for their DI citizens stationed abroad, especially if it’s a deliberate and blatant case.
One of my relatives had a gig with diplomatic immunity for a few years near Washington. I don’t know about other countries, but he got the whole stern talking-to thing - If there is any hint that you or anyone in your family is a problem that could create an international incident. that phase of your career will end and you (and family) will be summoned back to Ottawa. IIRC the country has the option of waiving diplomatic immunity for their DI citizens stationed abroad, especially if it’s a deliberate and blatant case.
This is true and there have been some famous cases. A diplomat from Georgia was convicted of manslaughter in the United States after a drunk driving incident. The State Department asked Georgia to waive diplomatic immunity so he could be prosecuted and they agreed.
The typical treatment for diplomats who fuck up in the host country is to declare them persona non grata and expel them. I assume that such expulsion is permanent. So at the very least there must be some long-term record kept.
The Wikipedia article on diplomatic immunity has a list of incidents. It’s noteworthy that the U.S. never waives diplomatic immunity when American citizens are involved (for instance in the cases of Christopher Van Goethem, Douglas Kent or, most famously, Raymond Allen Davis).
But… In a country whose jurisprudence system is founded on the principle “innocent until proven guilty”, where does that leave an accused diplomat? If he can never be brought to trial, he can never be found guilty. So does an accused diplomat remain in “accused status” forever?
To what extent does being declared persona non grata and expelled have on the rest of a person’s life or career? For example, is it effectively equivalent to a criminal conviction, or is it more like being fired from a job?
“Sorry, we are unable to rent an apartment to you at this time because your background check indicated that you were declared persona non grata and expelled from East Ruritania on the basis of two allegations of Aggravated Mopery for which your embassy claimed diplomatic immunity for you. We don’t let criminals live here, even if they had diplomatic immunity when they committed their crimes.”
Being diplomatically expelled is not a criminal matter. Is it at the whim of the host country, and is done as often for political posturing as it is for suspected criminals.
A person with diplomatic immunity who is expelled may still be tried for a crime by their country of origin.
Yes, I know. But going back to the OP’s question, how well documented and rigorous would the underlying allegations be? For example, would they be expected to be only a few sheets of paper with bare allegations (e.g. “On June 4, Donny Diplomat committed Aggravated Mopery in Capital City according to an investigation that was later purged from police files. End of Report.”), or would they typically include witness affidavits, forensic analyses of physical evidence, copies of security camera footage, etc.?
Do non-criminal diplomatic expulsions commonly show up on background checks? E.g. even if Hapless R. Ex-Diplomat didn’t actually get charged with anything in criminal court, would a future employer see the expulsion and be able to form their own opinion on whether or not Ex-Diplomat actually committed the acts that he was accused of?
“They” would be the files and/or allegations surrounding and/or supporting a country’s decision to expel a diplomat. They could include affidavits from bystanders testifying that they saw the diplomat committing a Dastardly Act, copies of security camera footage that appear to show the diplomat committing such acts, records found on a hard drive, fingerprints lifted off of weapons, bullet shell casings, a bloody glove, etc.