Abstract

This study examines the immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction particularly in the case of Equatorial Guinea v. France. State officials play an important role in effective foreign relations between states. Several international regulations have been instrumental in regulating the immunity of these state representatives. However, despite these existing legislations the effectiveness of these laws is highly questionable especially regarding the case study.

The main objective of the study was to ascertain the effectiveness of the laws regulating the immunity of state officials from foreign Criminal jurisdiction in the case of Equatorial Guinea v France. The study adopts a doctrinal research method consisting of both systematic and thematic analysis of legal rules and already existing data on Immunities of state officials in International Law. This research reveals that despite these efforts put in place by international bodies there are still state officials who escape immunity for crimes committed in foreign jurisdictions and that developed nations tend to disrespect or rather ignore the immunities of foreign state officials in developing countries.

This reveals that much still has to be done to better this situation. To this effect, this study recommends the amendment of legislations, particularly the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Palermo Convention in order to expressly spell out provisions that will be easily comprehensible and unambiguous.

This study concludes that, some state agents take advantage of immunity to commit grievous crimes and states disrespect such immunity sometimes to demonstrate dominance, but this does not change the sole purpose of immunity, which is always considered as a means to protect the sovereign who is an embodiment of the state.

Check out: Law Project Topics with Materials