We had a case last week where a 20 year old male forced open the lady’s house nextdoor, assaulted her and twice tried to rape her. She eventfully escaped and he was arrested.
His gransmother is a diplomat from Namibia and he was listed as being in her care. The police had to release him as he had diplomatic immunity.
I would like to know why diplomatic immunity should exist in cases like this. I understand that the diplomatic missions belong to another country and therefor any act commited on it’s soil is the responsibility of the particular country’s law system BUT any person should apply by the laws of the host nation when outside the diplomatic grounds. When arrested commiting an offence in the host’s country, the person should stand trail there as if he is a normal tourist.
It can be argued that diplomatic immunity protects the many and is abused only by the few, a simple change in the tenor of the rules could prevent such abuse ever occurring. The Vienna Convention must be amended to stipulate that foreign states will be expected to waive immunity for any ambassadorial official or family member accused of serious crime, unless they can prove reasonable grounds for suspicion that the prosecution is unfounded. In this way, the actions of diplomats may become more honest and accountable.
What is diplomatic immunity?
Allows representatives of foreign governments to work and operate under the laws of their home country while abroad.
^ U.S. State Department Chart on Diplomatic Immunity
The grandson I suppose is immediate family.
I don’t think diplomatic immunity means (shouldn’t mean) they get away with crime…but are to be prosecuted according to the legal system of the home country.
According to State Department Chart those with diplomatic immunity, and in some cases, recognized family members cannot be detained. Looks like immunity depends on job status within the foreign service.
If I were victim in such circumstance would feel defenseless and outraged that such behavior not punished.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
If I were victim in such circumstance would feel defenseless and outraged that such behavior not punished.
[/QUOTE]
The worst in this case is that the culprit went back to staying next to the woman. Immagine that this woman go to sleep and wake up each morning knowing hir rapist lives next door, can tryand rape her again, and still not be jailed!
Such laws are needed because diplomatic norms have to be applicable everywhere.
Not all countries have highly developed, fair, judicial systems. In some countries, the judiciary is open to abuse.
Suppose you have 2 fictional dictatorships, Zoldavia and Zekistan. Zoldavia suspects Zekistan of fomenting rebel activity. Zoldavia could simply tell the ambassador's female neighbour to lodge a rape claim.
This would enable Zoldavia to hold a rigged trial (as is the norm in Zoldavia) and sentence the Zekistani Ambassador to life imprisonment.
Having this level of diplomatic immunity avoids such situations. For Zoldavia to arrest the Zekistani ambassador and charge his with any kind of crime would violate the Vienna Convention and thus protects the Zekistani ambassador from being punished for his country's perceived actions.
Granted, in a developed country such behaviour is fat less liekly than in a less-developed country, but diplomatic tules must be applicable across the board to avoid having a multiple-tier system where certain countries have more rights than others.
On the other hand, the government could declare this person with diplomatica immunity to be persona non grata and thus force him to leave.