I recently heard of a prince in another country kidnapping an american and holding her i his country, with America not being able to do anything because of DI.
I think the title says it best.
Well, a couple of years ago a Georgian diplomat to America ran over and killed a teenager while driving drunk. They couldn’t charge him here, but of course Georgia called him back. I’m not sure what (if anything) he was charged with over there, but he was removed from his post. I would imagine most responsible countries would respond similarly.
Vague recollection of a university Public International Law course tells me that diplomats can still be charged for crimes unrelated to their job, but perhaps that’s only British Commonwealth countries.
If the actions took place in a foreign country, than Diplomatic Immunity does really apply.
If the actions took place in the US, but the foreign diplomat has returned to the other country, I’m not sure DI applies either. Extradition treaties would be interesting, but if the foreign nation doesn’t want to give the person up, I’m not sure what the US can do.
If the criminal act took place in the US, and the diplomat is still in the US, there still isn’t a lot the US can do. See the following chart:
http://www.state.gov/m/ds/immunities/c9127.htm
Pretty much all you can do is issue them a traffic citation. Beyond that, their government must waive the immunity by my reading.
So, if I understand correctly, a diplomat could do murder or some other major crime, and if the home country doesn’t prosecute he gets off scot free?
While Diplomatic Immunity is not a license to commit a crime, a person with DI cannot be tried for any crime in his host country unless his home country agrees to waive his immunity. In most cases, a diplomat will be called home.
In the case of the Georgian diplomat, Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze DID waive the diplomat’s rights. Whether he was actually tried here or sent back, I don’t know. However, when an American diplomat mowed down and killed an 11-year old girl in Moscow in 1993, the U.S. refused to waive immunity and the diplomat was called home within 36 hours of the incident. No disciplinary action was taken.
In response to the OP, a prince of Country X allegedly holding someone against their will in Country X is subject to his country’s laws, and the situation has nothing to do with DI. DI only extends to a foreigner while in a host country. Our embassy may use diplomatic channels to get the person released (or at least verify the person’s status and welfare) and we may threaten to relieve the prince of his diplomatic status, but that is about the extent of our options.
Diplomatic immunity is an ancient custom that affords messengers safety when entering foreign and possibly hostile territory. It’s intent is to protect a “messenger” against prosecution should he/she inadvertently break local laws, especially those due to cultural mores and language barriers.
DI can apply to the children (even adult children) of persons in the diplomatic service of their country while in the US.
They can be sent home rather than charged with assault, or with rape. This has been a repeated problem with some countries and their college-age dependents of diplomats.
It’s generally been kept quite hushed.