Advanced

Jurisdictional Immunities of the State - The Balance Between State Immunity and Jus Cogens

Jönsson, Karolin LU (2017) LAGF03 20172
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The jurisdictional immunity of states in cases concerning serious human rights violations has been extensively discussed in the international legal debate, and has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions by courts of various jurisdictions. While serious human rights violations constitute breaches of peremptory norms, jus cogens, from which no derogation is permitted, the law of state immunity is said to constitute a procedural bar to the exercise of jurisdiction by national courts. The conflict between state immunity and jus cogens was brought to a head in the 2012 judgement of the International Court of Justice “Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)”. From the outset of this judgement, the... (More)
The jurisdictional immunity of states in cases concerning serious human rights violations has been extensively discussed in the international legal debate, and has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions by courts of various jurisdictions. While serious human rights violations constitute breaches of peremptory norms, jus cogens, from which no derogation is permitted, the law of state immunity is said to constitute a procedural bar to the exercise of jurisdiction by national courts. The conflict between state immunity and jus cogens was brought to a head in the 2012 judgement of the International Court of Justice “Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)”. From the outset of this judgement, the purpose of this paper is to examine the balance in international law between state immunity and serious human right violations of jus cogens status. While the International Court of Justice concluded that customary international law has not yet developed to the point where a state is not entitled to immunity in case of serious violations of human rights law or the law of armed conflict, this conclusion has been contested by national courts and legal scholars. While this paper agrees with the outcome of the judgement, it does not fully agree with the arguments and reasoning of the court. According to this paper, the balance between state immunity and jus cogens may not yet be finally settled. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Staters immunitet i fall som rör grova kränkningar av mänskliga rättigheter har blivit flitigt omdiskuterad i den folkrättsliga debatten, och har gett upphov till motstridiga domar bland olika nationella domstolar. Medan grova kränkningar av mänskliga rättigheter utgör brott mot tvingande folkrättsliga regler, jus cogens, från vilka inga avsteg är tillåtna, så utgör reglerna om statsimmunitet ett processuellt hinder mot jurisdiktionsutövning av nationella domstolar. Konflikten mellan statsimmunitet och jus cogens fördes till sin spets i den Internationella domstolens (ICJ’s) avgörande från 2012 “Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)”. Med utgångspunkt i detta avgörande, syftar denna uppsats till att... (More)
Staters immunitet i fall som rör grova kränkningar av mänskliga rättigheter har blivit flitigt omdiskuterad i den folkrättsliga debatten, och har gett upphov till motstridiga domar bland olika nationella domstolar. Medan grova kränkningar av mänskliga rättigheter utgör brott mot tvingande folkrättsliga regler, jus cogens, från vilka inga avsteg är tillåtna, så utgör reglerna om statsimmunitet ett processuellt hinder mot jurisdiktionsutövning av nationella domstolar. Konflikten mellan statsimmunitet och jus cogens fördes till sin spets i den Internationella domstolens (ICJ’s) avgörande från 2012 “Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)”. Med utgångspunkt i detta avgörande, syftar denna uppsats till att undersöka balansen i internationell rätt mellan statsimmunitet och grova kränkningar av mänskliga rättigheter av jus cogens status. Medan ICJ kom fram till att internationell sedvanerätt inte ännu har utvecklat ett undantag till statsimmuniteten för grova människorättskränkningar eller brott mot den internationella humanitära rätten, så har denna slutsats ifrågasatts av nationella domstolar och i den juridiska doktrinen. Medan denna uppsats håller med om slutsatsen i domen, så ifrågasätter den vissa av domstolens bakomliggande argument. Enligt denna uppsats är det inte säkert att balansen mellan statsimmunitet och jus cogens är fullständigt avgjord. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jönsson, Karolin LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20172
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Public International Law, State immunity, Jus cogens, International Court of Justice
language
English
id
8930230
date added to LUP
2018-02-06 11:52:24
date last changed
2018-02-06 11:52:24
@misc{8930230,
  abstract     = {The jurisdictional immunity of states in cases concerning serious human rights violations has been extensively discussed in the international legal debate, and has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions by courts of various jurisdictions. While serious human rights violations constitute breaches of peremptory norms, jus cogens, from which no derogation is permitted, the law of state immunity is said to constitute a procedural bar to the exercise of jurisdiction by national courts. The conflict between state immunity and jus cogens was brought to a head in the 2012 judgement of the International Court of Justice “Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)”. From the outset of this judgement, the purpose of this paper is to examine the balance in international law between state immunity and serious human right violations of jus cogens status. While the International Court of Justice concluded that customary international law has not yet developed to the point where a state is not entitled to immunity in case of serious violations of human rights law or the law of armed conflict, this conclusion has been contested by national courts and legal scholars. While this paper agrees with the outcome of the judgement, it does not fully agree with the arguments and reasoning of the court. According to this paper, the balance between state immunity and jus cogens may not yet be finally settled.},
  author       = {Jönsson, Karolin},
  keyword      = {Public International Law,State immunity,Jus cogens,International Court of Justice},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Jurisdictional Immunities of the State - The Balance Between State Immunity and Jus Cogens},
  year         = {2017},
}