Statsföreträdares immunitetsskydd vid internationella brott
(2017) LAGF03 20172Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- En fråga som har diskuterats i den folkrättsliga debatten en längre period gäller hur man ska se på statsföreträdare som gör sig skyldiga till internationella brott. I och med etablerandet av olika internationella domstolar och tribunaler har principen om individuellt straffrättsligt ansvar stärkts, då inget immunitetsskydd åtnjuts inför dessa domstolar. Härtill följer dock att de internationella domstolarnas jurisdiktion är begränsad.
Denna uppsats syftar till att redogöra för statsföreträdares immunitetsskydd vid internationella brott, med utgångspunkt i praxis och doktrin. Uppsatsen behandlar även den historiska bakgrunden till immunitetsskyddet som åtnjuts.
Immuniteten för statschefer utvecklades ur immuniteten för stater och... (More) - En fråga som har diskuterats i den folkrättsliga debatten en längre period gäller hur man ska se på statsföreträdare som gör sig skyldiga till internationella brott. I och med etablerandet av olika internationella domstolar och tribunaler har principen om individuellt straffrättsligt ansvar stärkts, då inget immunitetsskydd åtnjuts inför dessa domstolar. Härtill följer dock att de internationella domstolarnas jurisdiktion är begränsad.
Denna uppsats syftar till att redogöra för statsföreträdares immunitetsskydd vid internationella brott, med utgångspunkt i praxis och doktrin. Uppsatsen behandlar även den historiska bakgrunden till immunitetsskyddet som åtnjuts.
Immuniteten för statschefer utvecklades ur immuniteten för stater och antog till en början en mer extensiv grundsyn, där statschefen sågs som en slags inkarnation av staten. I enlighet med internationell sedvanerätt finns två olika typer av immunitetsskydd; processuell immunitet (ratione personae) och funktionell immunitet (ratione materiae). Medan den förstnämnda typen är titelbaserad och knuten till företrädarens position, är den senare handlingsbaserad och sammankopplad till de vidtagna handlingarna.
I förhållande till den processuella immuniteten som åtnjuts av vissa höga statsfunktionärer, har praxis och doktrin påvisat att denna är fullständig och absolut, även då internationella brott har begåtts. Frågan om undantag från den funktionella immuniteten är mer komplex och har i praxis utgått från olika typer av argument såsom brottens eventuella jus cogens-karaktär och klassificering som officiell handlingar. Det råder lite samstämmighet i förhållande till nämnda arguments tillämplighet. Slutsatsen i denna uppsats, sett till praxis och doktrin som aktualiserar frågorna, är att statsföreträdare i många fall kan begå internationella brott och samtidigt åberopa immunitet. (Less) - Abstract
- A matter that has been discussed in the international legal debate for a long period of time is the one regarding state officials found guilty of international crimes. With the establishment of various international courts and tribunals, the principle of individual criminal liability has been strengthened, since no immunity is enjoyed before such courts. However, the jurisdictional scope of the international courts is limited.
This paper aims to examine the exceptions to the immunity enjoyed by state officials in regards to international crimes. The thesis will be based on the study of judgements and legal literature and will also examine the historical background to the immunity protection enjoyed.
The immunity of Heads of State... (More) - A matter that has been discussed in the international legal debate for a long period of time is the one regarding state officials found guilty of international crimes. With the establishment of various international courts and tribunals, the principle of individual criminal liability has been strengthened, since no immunity is enjoyed before such courts. However, the jurisdictional scope of the international courts is limited.
This paper aims to examine the exceptions to the immunity enjoyed by state officials in regards to international crimes. The thesis will be based on the study of judgements and legal literature and will also examine the historical background to the immunity protection enjoyed.
The immunity of Heads of State evolved from the immunity afforded to states and initially assumed a more extensive conception, where the head of state was seen as a sort of incarnation of the state. In accordance with international customary law, there are two types of immunity; procedural immunity (ratione personae) and functional immunity (ratione materiae). While the former type is title based and linked to the state official’s position, the latter is conduct based and attached to the acts performed.
In regards to the procedural immunity enjoyed by some high-ranking state officials, several judgements and legal doctrine have shown that the protection offered is absolute, even in assertion to international crimes. However, in regard to exceptions from the functional immunity, the matter is more complex. There are numerous arguments that have been asserted to this question, in both judgements and legal literature. One argument refers to the possible peremptory/jus cogens nature of certain international crimes and another one refers to whether international crimes can be considered official acts. There is little consensus on the applicability of these arguments.
The conclusion of this thesis, with reference to the judgements and the legal literature available on the subject, is that state officials can commit international crimes and still invoke immunity in many circumstances. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8930660
- author
- Kaakati, Nourelhouda LU
- supervisor
-
- Anna Nilsson LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20172
- year
- 2017
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Folkrätt, Immunitetsskydd, Statsimmunitet, Personell immunitet
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8930660
- date added to LUP
- 2018-02-07 11:05:59
- date last changed
- 2018-02-07 11:05:59
@misc{8930660,
abstract = {{A matter that has been discussed in the international legal debate for a long period of time is the one regarding state officials found guilty of international crimes. With the establishment of various international courts and tribunals, the principle of individual criminal liability has been strengthened, since no immunity is enjoyed before such courts. However, the jurisdictional scope of the international courts is limited.
This paper aims to examine the exceptions to the immunity enjoyed by state officials in regards to international crimes. The thesis will be based on the study of judgements and legal literature and will also examine the historical background to the immunity protection enjoyed.
The immunity of Heads of State evolved from the immunity afforded to states and initially assumed a more extensive conception, where the head of state was seen as a sort of incarnation of the state. In accordance with international customary law, there are two types of immunity; procedural immunity (ratione personae) and functional immunity (ratione materiae). While the former type is title based and linked to the state official’s position, the latter is conduct based and attached to the acts performed.
In regards to the procedural immunity enjoyed by some high-ranking state officials, several judgements and legal doctrine have shown that the protection offered is absolute, even in assertion to international crimes. However, in regard to exceptions from the functional immunity, the matter is more complex. There are numerous arguments that have been asserted to this question, in both judgements and legal literature. One argument refers to the possible peremptory/jus cogens nature of certain international crimes and another one refers to whether international crimes can be considered official acts. There is little consensus on the applicability of these arguments.
The conclusion of this thesis, with reference to the judgements and the legal literature available on the subject, is that state officials can commit international crimes and still invoke immunity in many circumstances.}},
author = {{Kaakati, Nourelhouda}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Statsföreträdares immunitetsskydd vid internationella brott}},
year = {{2017}},
}