외교관계에 있어서 외교관의 특권ㆍ면제의 일고찰

A Review on the privileges and immunities in diplomatic relations

Various fields of international law are always on the dynamic track of change. The development of international law is mainly triggered by the rapid, sometimes unexpected change of international realities. The development of international law on human rights, economic relations, democratic governance, use of force, and environmental issues is the best example for reflecting and echoing the movement of international law. Although it is reflected by new realities and challenges in international relations, international law on diplomatic relations, specifically international law on privileges and immunities of diplomats, seems to maintain its original form, contents and status in the pantheon of international law. Under the impact of globalization on international relations, the role of diplomats becomes more complicated and multifaceted. For the purpose of facilitating the activities of diplomats, privileges and immunities of diplomats should be respected by both international law and domestic law of every State. Also, privileges and immunities of diplomats should be enjoyed within scope of international law on diplomatic relations. Put it differently, the most critical thing is how to find out the middle path for striking the balance between the respecting the domestic laws and regulations of receiving State and the independence of diplomats’ activities of sending State. This article explores various aspects of international law on diplomatic relations. For example, difference between state immunity and diplomatic immunity, inviolability of the mission premises, personal inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction, immunity from execution, diplomatic bag, waiver of immunity, and duties of the mission towards the receiving State are analyzed in detail with relevant case study. Reviewing the dynamics of law on the diplomatic relations, this article foresees the desirable direction of the development of law on diplomatic relations and suggests the best way to strike the balance between the mutual interests of sending State and receiving State.