EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND

APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz

THE CONCEPT OF IMMUNITIES OF THE INTERNATIONAL

ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR OFFICIALS: THEORY AND
PRACTICE
Khudayberganova Nigina To`lqin qizi
Master’s Degree Student of the faculty of International Law
University of World Economy and Diplomacy
e-mail: [email protected]
+998907098373
https://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8004508

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Received: 27th May 2023 The concept of immunity of international organizations
Accepted: 03rd June 2023 and their officials is an important aspect of international
Online: 04th June 2023 law. Immunity protects international organizations and
KEY WORDS their officials from legal processes in the host state and is
Immunity; International necessary to ensure that international organizations can
organizations; Officials; Legal carry out their functions effectively and without
processes; Host state; Effective interference.
functions; Jurisdiction; Waiver; This article provides an overview of the concept of
Limitations; Accountability; immunity of international organizations and their
Transparency; International officials. It discusses the different types of immunity
Court of Justice; Human rights; available to international organizations and their
Violations; International law. officials, including immunity from jurisdiction and
immunity from execution. The article also examines the
scope and limitations of immunity, and the circumstances
under which immunity can be waived or lifted.
The article highlights the importance of balancing the
need for immunity with the need for accountability and
transparency. It discusses the mechanisms available for
resolving disputes related to immunity, including the
International Court of Justice and other dispute resolution
mechanisms.
Finally, the article considers recent developments in the
law of immunity of international organizations and their
officials, including the increasing recognition of the
responsibility of international organizations to respect
human rights and the growing trend toward limiting
immunity in cases of serious violations of international
law.
Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of
the concept of immunity of international organizations
and their officials, and highlights the ongoing challenges
and complexities involved in balancing immunity with

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 5

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz

accountability and transparency in the international

system.

The concept of immunities of international organizations is an important aspect of

international law. International organizations and their officials are granted immunities to
ensure that they can perform their functions without undue interference from host states or
other actors. Immunities can take different forms and are typically granted by international
treaties or agreements.
To understand the privileges and immunities of international organizations and special
missions, it is important to first provide an overview of the legal foundation for these
immunities. While diplomatic, consular, foreign official, and head of state immunities are
commonly known, there are other types of immunities as well. It is worth noting that
international organizations and their officials are frequently granted immunities as a result of
the constituent instrument that established the organization. The questions of immunity and
inviolability are stated in a headquarters agreement of the organization with the member-
states [Barry E. Carter, Allen. S. Weiner, Duncan B. Hollis, International law (seventh edition)
Wolters Kluwer, New York. ISBN 978-1-4548-9268-7. P-717.]. According to the given
statement an initial question arises: `Why should international organizations and its
representatives enjoy immunities at all? Is it legal to compare the employees of the
international organizations to diplomats? The second part of the research is dedicated to
these questions. Firstly, we will discuss the concept and nature of the immunity of
international organizations.
While learning the topic of immunities and privileges, several questions come to mind:
a) are they the eliminations from jurisdictions? b) what constitutes the jurisdiction and how it
occurs? As it is defined by the words of W.Worster in broad meaning jurisdiction is the lawful
authority originated to demand the legal consequences for actions of actors [William Worster,
Cases and materials on the Law of International organizations, Abingdon , Oxon New York,
Routledge, 2021. P 450, p-308]. In other words, jurisdiction, firstly, the mechanism or
authority that regulates the institute of responsibility of the actors of law in domestic and
international law. Secondly, in direct legal conception, jurisdiction is a warrant to apply the
definite rules of law to the appearing conflict situations and cases.
Jurisdiction can be also specifically limited in addition to the broad forms [The authors
of the book before give three types of jurisdictions in general: prescription, adjudicative and
enforcement jurisdiction.] of it. Jurisdiction can be ratione personae (regarding a special person
who is usually a public official, or it is the result of actor`s status. For instance, head of the State,
ministers, ambassadors), ratione materiae (also called as functional when the jurisdiction
extends to the functions performed. In other words, functional immunity depends on the function
of the actor or the individual`s actions fall under the protection of immunity [Ademola Abbas,

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 6

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz
Complete International Law: Text, Cases and Materials (2 nd edition), Oxford University Press,
2014.]) and ratione temporis (the jurisdiction shows if the dispute exists, or it finds claim
inadmissible).
In addition, jurisdiction can take on different types and forms that are characterized by
their links to the exercise of jurisdiction. It is important to note the distinction between
immunity and non-justiciability, as they are not interchangeable concepts. Legal rules come
into play when determining whether a case is subject to immunity or non-justiciability.
Immunity differs from non-justiciability in that immunity pertains to the court's inability to
hear a case due to the identity of the alleged perpetrator, whereas non-justiciability pertains
to the court's inability to hear a case due to the nature of the subject matter.
After examining the topic of jurisdiction, we can now delve into the concepts of
immunity and privileges. It is crucial to differentiate between these two concepts because
many disputes arise from the confusion surrounding them. Some people tend to overlook the
contrast between immunity and privileges, while others studying these concepts may have
numerous misunderstandings. These misconceptions often stem from the question of
whether privileges are a broader concept than immunities or vice versa. According to
scholarly research, privilege is an exception from jurisdiction, meaning that laws do not apply
in certain circumstances [William Worster, Cases and materials on the Law of International
organizations, Abingdon , Oxon New York, Routledge, 2021. P 450, p-309]. It means that the
laws do not apply to a particular person or subject of matter.
Immunity is a legal concept that denotes an exemption from jurisdiction. This means
that while laws still apply, the individual in question cannot be subject to legal proceedings for
violating them. Immunity is a principle that exists in both international and domestic law,
which places limits on the authority of courts in one state to exercise jurisdiction over another
state. It is an exception to the general rule that states have jurisdiction over any acts
committed within their territory, whether they are criminal or civil in nature [Ademola Abbas,
Complete International law: Text, Cases and Materials (2nd edition), Oxford University Press,
2014. P-267].
To make the picture clearer several examples of obtaining immunity and consequences
of it will be discussed. On November 12, 2017, Chingiz Mukhammadeev, the citizen of Russian
Federation, an employee of the Russian Embassy in Ukraine, knocked down a woman and a
child, where they received various levels of injury. In this situation, Ukrainian courts have
jurisdiction over the subject matter (Russian diplomat), but they are prevented from
exercising the jurisdiction towards him because of the identity of Ch.Mukhammadeev. Being a
diplomat he falls into the category of subjects of law who enjoys special status and immunity
from jurisdiction. That is why he cannot be tried by courts of the Ukraine. Furthermore, such
incidents in the field of immunity were aroused among the diplomats of Germany in 2008.
This incident happened in Moscow. B.T.Hobert, employee of the German embassy knocked
down two students in Moscow on November 30, 2008.
Arter the accident B.T.Hobert informed the police office about the happened scene and
his diplomatic immunity. In couple of days, he was in Germany, where the criminal case
against him was opened. In the territory of Russian Federation, he was dot detained and
arrested; other incidents in the field of immunity occured among the representatives of the

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 7

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz
United Nation (UN). The accident happened with the electrical engineer in the United Nations
Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan [From the DAWN Newspaper published in
April 13, 2011.]. The UN representative caused a collision in his car under alcohol influence
and hit the citizen of Canada living in Pakistan. According to the information of the Kohsar
police, Patrick Kibuta, the UN representative, enjoyed diplomatic immunity. That is why he
was not detained and arrested till the fact of alcohol was proved, even the commitment of the
wrongful act had an aggravating nature. The police of the Kohsar confiscated the UN`s vehicle,
after the blood alcohol level was found elevated. After the car was impounded and the
accident registered, P. Kibuta was allowed to go leaving the car in police station. In the end of
the process police of Kohsar contacted with the UN`s security department and sent a note to
UN through the Foreign Office of Kohsar.
To conclude, it is crucial to distinguish the differences and similarities between the
immunity of international organizations and other actors of international law, such as states.
One of the main differences is that the immunity of international organizations is closely
linked to their international personality. The principle of par in parem non habet
jurisdictionem, or "equals have no jurisdiction over each other," is a well-established rule of
law in this context. This means that actors, especially states, enjoy absolute immunity from
the judicial jurisdictions of other states. [Aaron X. Fellmeth and Maurice Horwitz, Guide to
Latin in International Law (1 ed.), Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN-13: 9780195369380].
The second point to consider is that international personality is an equal legal characteristic
shared by both states and international organizations. As subjects of international law, both
states and international organizations are granted international personality, which grants
them certain rights and obligations under international law [Cassese, A. (2013). International
law. Oxford University Press].
The immunities of international organizations are rooted in customary international law
and are recognized by various international legal instruments. For example, the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
of 1963 provide for immunities for diplomatic and consular officials respectively. The
Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of 1946 provides for the
immunities of the United Nations and its officials.
More broadly, it should be stated that immunity of the officials of international
organizations is recognized in:
a) United Nations Charter (in Article 105).
b) General convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (went into
effect in 1946).
c) Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies (1947).
As it was stated above immunity of the officials of international organizations is
recognized in U.N. Charter. According to the Article 105 United Nations Organization enjoy in
the territory of each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the
fulfillment of its purposes`[ Article 105 of United Nations Charter]. Moreover, it is stated in
Article that the representatives of United Nations members and officials enjoy such privileges
and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection
with the Organization.

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 8

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz
It means that the organization enjoy immunities and privileges to exercise its functions
in the territory of the States which are the members to Organization. In addition to this, the
representatives and officials of the Organization are entitled to immunities and privileges in
the territory of member-states as well as the Organization itself. Therefore, the immunity of
international organizations and its officials is ‘functional’.
As it was discussed before functional immunity or ratione materiae [Aziz Epik, No
Functional Immunity for Crimes under International Law before Foreign Domestic Courts: An
Unequivocal Message from the German Federal Court of Justice, Journal of International
Criminal Justice, Volume 19, Issue 5, November 2021, Pages 1263–1281] distinguishes from
other types of immunities. First, functional immunity is granted to officials for taking any
official act due to their functional responsibilities, regardless of their rank or position
comparing to ratione personae [C. Kreß, in K. Ambos (ed.) ‘Cooperation with respect to waiver
of immunity and consent to surrender', The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
(4th edn., C.H. Beck, Hart and Nomos, 2021); R. van Alebeek, ‘Functional Immunity of State
Officials from the Criminal Jurisdiction of Foreign National Courts’, in T. Ruys, N. Angelet, and
L. Ferro (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law (Cambridge
University Press, 2019) 496–524, at 496; G. Werle and F. Jeßberger, Principles of International
Criminal Law (5th edn., Oxford University Press, 2020), at para. 833]. Secondly, in comparison
to ratione temporis, when the jurisdiction shows if the dispute exists, or it finds claim
inadmissible functional immunity can spread on several periods of solving two or more
disputes.
The next important document related to privileges and immunities is the General
Convention, which provides for privileges and immunities for three categories of individuals
who are essential to the work of the United Nations. These categories include: 1)
representatives of member states; 2) United Nations officials; and 3) experts on mission for
the United Nations. While representatives of member states are entitled to appropriate
diplomatic privileges and immunities, United Nations officials, who are full-time employees,
enjoy "functional" immunity. This type of immunity is defined in Section 18(a) of Article V as
immunity from liability "for what is said or written by them and for all acts performed by
them in their capacity as officers" [United Nations. (1946). Convention on the Privileges and
Immunities of the United Nations].
Another convention that deals with the immunities and privileges of officials of
international organizations is the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the
Specialized Agencies. This convention has a more specialized structure that is specifically
focused on the immunities and privileges of officials and representatives of international
organizations [United Nations. (1947). Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the
Specialized Agencies].
The Statute of the League of Nations in 1919 first addressed the topic of immunity and
privileges, but it only provided for "diplomatic" privileges and immunities for employees and
the inviolability of the organization's property. However, these vague rules related to
immunity of organizations required further clarification in order to become practical tools for
international organizations officials and judges in national courts to determine the legal
capacity of organizations to engage in a specific legal transaction or whether they are immune

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 9

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz
from legal action. Additionally, there was uncertainty regarding the extent to which officials of
international organizations and representatives of member states to the United Nations
should enjoy privileges and immunities.
In this context, the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized
Agencies highlights the importance of clearly distinguishing the immunities of officials of
international organizations.
International organizations and their officials are often entitled to immunities in
accordance with the terms of the constituent treaties that created them [Carter, Weiner, &
Hollis, International Law. Wolters Kluwer in New York 7th ed. 2018. p.716-717]. International
organizations and their officials are frequently granted immunities in accordance with the
provisions of the constituent treaties that establish them. These immunities are designed to
protect the independence and effectiveness of the organizations and their officials in
performing their functions. The specific immunities granted to international organizations
and their officials can vary depending on the nature and functions of the organization, as well
as the terms of the governing treaties. In general, international organizations and their
officials enjoy a range of immunities, including immunity from legal process, immunity from
taxation, and immunity from seizure of property. However, the scope and extent of these
immunities can be subject to debate and criticism, as they may be seen as limiting the
accountability and transparency of international organizations and their officials [Aust, A.
(2010). Handbook of International Law. Cambridge University Press].
In conclusion, international organizations and their officials enjoy various immunities
and privileges under international law, which are designed to protect them from interference
by host states and other actors. These immunities and privileges include immunity from
jurisdiction, inviolability of premises, and exemption from taxes and customs duties, among
others. While these protections are important for ensuring the independence and
effectiveness of IOs, they can also create legal and political obstacles to accountability and
redress for alleged wrongdoing. As a result, there have been several notable cases where IOs
and their officials have enjoyed immunity and privileges, as well as challenges to their
immunity and privileges in cases of alleged human rights violations and other misconduct.
Ultimately, the balance between immunity and accountability is a complex issue that requires
careful consideration of the interests of all stakeholders, including IOs, their officials, and the
communities they serve.

References:
1. Barry E. Carter, Allen. S. Weiner, Duncan B. Hollis, International law (seventh edition)
Wolters Kluwer, New York. ISBN 978-1-4548-9268-7. P-717.
2. William Worster, Cases and materials on the Law of International organizations,
Abingdon , Oxon New York, Routledge, 2021. P 450, p-308.
3. Ademola Abbas, Complete International Law: Text, Cases and Materials (2nd edition),
Oxford University Press, 2014.
4. Aaron X. Fellmeth and Maurice Horwitz, Guide to Latin in International Law (1 ed.),
Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN-13: 9780195369380.

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 10

 EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, FINANCE AND
APPLIED SCIENCES
Innovative Academy Research Support Center
UIF = 8.3 | SJIF = 5.961 www.in-academy.uz
5. Aziz Epik, No Functional Immunity for Crimes under International Law before Foreign
Domestic Courts: An Unequivocal Message from the German Federal Court of Justice, Journal
of International Criminal Justice, Volume 19, Issue 5, November 2021, Pages 1263–1281,
6. C. Kreß, in K. Ambos (ed.) ‘Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to
surrender', The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (4th edn., C.H. Beck, Hart
and Nomos, 2021); R. van Alebeek, ‘Functional Immunity of State Officials from the Criminal
Jurisdiction of Foreign National Courts’, in T. Ruys, N. Angelet, and L. Ferro (eds), The
Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law (Cambridge University Press,
2019) 496–524, at 496; G. Werle and F. Jeßberger, Principles of International Criminal Law
(5th edn., Oxford University Press, 2020), at para. 833.
7. Carter, Weiner, & Hollis, International Law. Wolters Kluwer in New York 7th ed. 2018.
p.716-717.
8. Aust, A. (2010). Handbook of International Law. Cambridge University Press.

Volume 3 Issue 6, June 2023 ISSN 2181-2853 Page 11