State Officials Of Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction Immunity Research

Recent years, more and more high-rank state officials are tried in foreigndomestic courts, even those who enjoyed immunities according to traditionalinternational law. It is a controversial issue when it comes to the immunities of stateofficials who committed criminal crimes, especially in case of international crimes.This article examines two types of immunities state officials enjoy which are knownas immunity ratione personae (personal immunity)and immunity ratione materiae(functional immunity)and the extent to which state officials are subject to prosecutionin foreign domestic courts for criminal crimes and international crimes.The conclusion is that state officials with immunity ratione personae must belimited to heads of state, heads of government and ministers of foreign affairs. Due totheir special status in international relationship and the principle of maxim par inparem non habet imperium, they enjoy an absolute and full immunity from foreignjurisdiction in any event as long as they are in office. While leaving their office, forcrimes committed in their private capacity they may be prosecuted and punished.Immunity ratione materiae is actually an instrument through which state officials maypass their responsibility to the Sate. All levels of state officials are granted when theyacted on behalf of their state and will never be held responsibility for those acts.To balance the immunity of state officials and impunity for international crimes,under the following four situations state officials may be held responsible:(a) to trialin international tribunals;(b) immunity waived by their own state;(c) to prosecute intheir own country; and (d) for crimes committed in private capacity while not in office.Anyway foreign domestic courts should avoid exercising jurisdiction over stateofficials who enjoy immunities for the smooth bilateral relationship and to complywith custom international law.