Introduction 1.

Until the early 19th century, each European nation had its own system of

diplomatic rank. The relative ranks of diplomats from different nations had been a source of considerable dispute, made more so by the insistence of major nations to have their diplomats ranked higher than those of minor nations, to be reflected in such things as table seatings. In an attempt to resolve the problem, the Congress of Vienna of 1815 formally established an international system of diplomatic ranks. 2. The four ranks within the system were:a. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, or simply Ambassador, who is a representative of the head of state. Equivalent, and in some traditions primus inter pares, is the Papal nuncio. Amongst Commonwealth countries, the equivalent title High Commissioner (who represents the government rather than the head of state) is normally used instead. A diplomatic mission headed by an ambassador would be known as an Embassy; one headed by a High Commissioner is called a High Commission. Ambassadors and high commissioners are entitled to use the title "His/Her Excellency" from the government and the people of the country they are appointed to. b. Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary. Usually just referred to as a Minister, an envoy is a diplomatic representative with plenipotentiary powers (i.e. full authority to represent the head of state), but ranking below an Ambassador. Where Embassies are headed by Ambassadors, Legations are headed by Ministers. c. Minister Resident or Resident Minister, or simply Minister, is the, now extremely rare, lowest rank of full diplomatic mission chief, only above Charg d'affaires (who is considered an extraordinary substitute).

d.

Charg d'affaires, or simply Charg. As the French title suggests, a charg d'affaires would be in charge of an embassy's or a legation's affairs in the (usually temporary) absence of a more senior diplomat. A Charg d'affaires ad interim or simply "a.i." is generally serving as head of mission during the temporary absence of the head of mission, while the Charg d'affaires e.p. or en pied maintains the same functions and duties as an ambassador, and is accredited not to the head of state but to the minister of foreign relations of the receiving state. As it turned out, this system of diplomatic rank did nothing to solve the problem of the nations' precedence. The appropriate diplomatic ranks used would be determined by the precedence among the nations; thus the exchanges of ambassadors (the highest diplomatic rank) would be reserved among major nations, or close allies and related monarchies. In contrast, a major nation would probably send just an envoy to a minor nation, who in return would send an envoy to the major nation. As a result, the United States did not use the rank of ambassador until their emergence as a major world power at the end of the 19th century. Indeed, until the mid-20th century, the majority of diplomats in the world were of the rank of minister plenipotentiary. In diplomatic parlance, all the diplomats that are assigned to a nation are known collectively as the diplomatic corps; one of these diplomats is recognized as the primus inter paresin practice rather a protocolar honorwho acts as the spokesperson for all, known as the Dean of the Diplomatic Corps or as Marshal of Diplomacy (generally based on the date of arrival in country or presentation of credentials to the head of state, although in some Catholic nations it is held automatically by the Papal Nuncio).

Modern Diplomats

Bilateral Diplomacy 3. The distinction between managers and officers is not necessarily as

apparent. Senior officers (such as first and second secretaries) often manage junior diplomats and locally-hired staff. 4. In modern diplomatic practice there are a number of diplomatic ranks

below Ambassador. Since most missions are now headed by an Ambassador, these ranks now rarely indicate a mission's (or its host nation's) relative importance, but rather reflect the diplomat's individual seniority within their own nation's diplomatic career path and in the diplomatic corps in the host nation: a. Ambassador (or High-Commissioner in Commonwealth missions)

b.

Minister Minister-Counselor Counselor First Secretary Second Secretary Third Secretary Attach Assistant Attach Charg d'affaires and Charg d'affaires, ad interim (or simply a.i.) is a separate title used when an Ambassador (or other head of mission) is not present, has not been appointed, or is otherwise not able to discharge duties in a specific location. Generally, the ad interim (temporary) "charg" (as they are often referred to) is another staff member (usually the second-most senior officer) accredited in the host country for the head of mission's temporary absences. In such cases, the diplomatic mission advises the local government (usually the foreign ministry) by means of a diplomatic note that a specific individual has been appointed charg for a specific or indefinite period of time. In contrast to an Ambassador, the specific agreement of the host government is not required.

c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.

5.

In certain cases, a Charg d'affaires may be appointed for long periods,

when a mission is headed by a non-resident Ambassador, when countries have established diplomatic relations but not exchanged Ambassadors, or when they have recalled their Ambassadors for a period of time (to express displeasure or serious disagreement) but not yet taken the extremely serious step of breaking diplomatic relations. 6. It is not unheard of for Charg d'affaires to remain in place for an indefinite

period. Since a Charg d'affaires does not need to present letters of credence to

the host head of state, appointing a charg may avoid a politically sensitive meeting or implying some form of approval or recognition of that head of state or government. Equally, the receiving country may express displeasure by declining to receive an Ambassador, but maintain diplomatic relations by accepting a Charg. 7. The term Attach is used for any diplomatic agent who does not fit in the

standard diplomatic ranks, often because they are not (or were not traditionally) members of the sending country's diplomatic service or foreign ministry, and were therefore only "attached" to the diplomatic mission. The most frequent use is for military attachs, but the diplomatic title may be used for any specific individual or position as required. Since administrative and technical staff benefit from only limited diplomatic immunity, some countries may routinely appoint support staff as attachs. Attach does not, therefore, connote any rank or position. Note that many traditional functionary roles, such as Press Attach or Cultural Attach, are not formal titles in diplomatic practice, although they may be used as a matter of custom. Multilateral Diplomacy 8. Furthermore, outside this traditional pattern of bilateral diplomacy, as a

rule on a permanent residency basis (though sometimes doubling elsewhere), certain ranks and positions were created specifically for multilateral diplomacy:

a.

A permanent representative is the equivalent of an ambassador,

normally of that rank, but accredited to an international body (mainly by memberand possibly observer states), not to a head of state.

b.

A resident representative (or sometimes simply representative) is

the equivalent in rank and privileges of an ambassador, but accredited by an international organization (generally a United Nations agency, or a Bretton Woods institution) to a country's government. The resident representative typically heads the country office of that international organization within that country.

c. globe.

A special ambassador is a government's specialist diplomat in a

particular field, not posted in residence, but often traveling around the

Diplomatic Immunity 9. Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity and a policy held between

governments that ensures that diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country's laws (although they can be expelled). It was agreed as international law in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), though the concept and custom have a much longer history. 10. Many principles of diplomatic immunity are now considered to be

customary law. Diplomatic immunity as an institution developed to allow for the maintenance of government relations, including during periods of difficulties and even armed conflict. When receiving diplomatswho formally represent the sovereignthe receiving head of state grants certain privileges and immunities to ensure they may effectively carry out their duties, on the understanding that these are provided on a reciprocal basis. 11. Originally, these privileges and immunities were granted on a bilateral, ad

hoc basis, which led to misunderstandings and conflict, pressure on weaker states, and an inability for other states to judge which party was at fault. Various international agreements known as the Vienna Conventions codified the rules and agreements, providing standards and privileges to all states. 12. It is possible for the official's home country to waive immunity; this tends to

happen only when the individual has committed a serious crime, unconnected with their diplomatic role (as opposed to, say, allegations of spying), or has witnessed such a crime. Alternatively, the home country may prosecute the individual. Many countries refuse to waive immunity as a matter of course; individuals have no authority to waive their own immunity (except perhaps in cases of defection).

13.

Concept of Diplomatic Immunity.

The

British

Parliament

first

guaranteed diplomatic immunity to foreign ambassadors in 1709, after Count Andrey Matveyev, a Russian resident in London, had been subjected to verbal and physical abuse by British bailiffs. 14. Modern diplomatic immunity evolved parallel to the development of

modern diplomacy. In the seventeenth century, European diplomats realized that protection from prosecution was essential to doing their jobs and a set of rules evolved guaranteeing the rights of diplomats. These were still confined to Western Europe, and were closely tied to the prerogatives of nobility. Thus an emissary to the Ottoman Empire could expect to be arrested and imprisoned upon the outbreak of hostilities between their state and the empire. 15. Warfare was not between individuals but between their sovereigns, and

the officers and officials of European governments and armies often changed employers. Truces and ceasefires were commonplace, along with fraternization between officers of enemy armies during them. When prisoners, the officers usually gave their parole and were only restricted to a city away from the theatre of war. Almost always, they were given leave to carry their personal sidearms. Even during French revolutionary wars, British scientists visited the French Academy. In such an atmosphere, it was easy to accept that some persons were immune to the laws. After all, they were still bound by strict requirements of honour and customs. 16. In the nineteenth century, the Congress of Vienna system reasserted the

rights of diplomats, and they have been largely respected since then as the European model has spread throughout the world. Currently, diplomatic immunity, as well as diplomatic relations as a whole, are governed internationally by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which has been ratified by almost every country in the world. 17. In modern times, diplomatic immunity continues to provide a means, albeit

imperfect, to safeguard diplomatic personnel from any animosity that might arise between nations. As one article put it: "So why do we agree to a system in which

we're dependent on a foreign country's whim before we can prosecute a criminal inside our own borders? The practical answer is: because we depend on other countries to honor our own diplomats' immunity just as scrupulously as we honor theirs." Exceptions to the Vienna Convention 18. Some countries have made reservations to the Vienna Convention on

Diplomatic Relations, but they are minor. Most important are the reservation by most Arab nations concerning the immunity of diplomatic bags and nonrecognition of Israel. A number of countries limit the diplomatic immunity of persons who are citizens of the receiving country. As nations keep faith to their treaties with differing zeal, other rules may also apply, though in most cases this summary is a reasonably accurate approximation. 19. It is important to note that the Convention does not cover the personnel of

international organizations, whose privileges are decided upon on a case-bycase basis, usually in the treaties founding such organizations. The United Nations system (including its agencies, which comprise the most recognizable international bodies such as the World Bank and many others) has a relatively standardized form of limited immunities for staff traveling on U.N. laissez-passer; diplomatic immunity is often granted to the highest-ranking officials of these agencies. 20. Consular officials (that do not have concurrent diplomatic accreditation)

formally have a more limited form of immunity, generally limited to their official duties. Diplomatic technical and administrative staff also have more limited immunity under the Vienna Convention; for this reason, some countries may accredit technical and administrative staff as attach. 21. Other categories of government officials that may travel frequently to other

countries may not have diplomatic passports or diplomatic immunity, such as members of the military, high-ranking government officials, ministers, and others. Many countries provide non-diplomatic official passports to such personnel, and there may be different classes of such travel documents such as official

passports, service passports, and others. De facto recognition of some form of immunity may be conveyed by states accepting officials traveling on such documents, or there may exist bilateral agreements to govern such cases (as in, for example, the case of military personnel conducting or observing exercises on the territory of the receiving country). 22. Formally, diplomatic immunity may be limited to officials accredited to a

host country, or traveling to or from their host country. In practice, many countries may effectively recognize diplomatic immunity for those traveling on diplomatic passports, with admittance to the country constituting acceptance of the diplomatic status. Diplomatic Immunity in the United States 23. The following chart outlines the immunities afforded to foreign diplomatic

personnel residing in the United States. In general, these rules follow the Vienna Convention and apply in other countries as well.

Residence may May Category detained be be ordinary procedures Diplomatic agent Member Diplomatic technical staff of No No No entered to arrested or subject

May traffic ticket

be

issued

May subpoenaed witness

be as

May prosecuted

be

Official family member

Yes

No

No

Same sponsor Same sponsor

as

administrative and No

Yes

No

No

as

No, for official Service staff Yes Yes Yes Yes acts. Otherwise, yes Consular Career Officers Consular Yes, if for a Yes felony pursuant a warrant. and to Yes No, acts. may for not official No, for official No be Otherwise, No

Testimony acts.

compelled in any

case. No, Yes Yes Yes for official

yes No, for official acts. Otherwise, yes official No, for official acts. Otherwise, yes No No

Honorary consular officers

acts. Yes, in all other cases

Consular employees

No, Yes Yes Yes

for

acts. Yes, in all other cases

International Diplomatic-level organization staff of missions to international organizations No, Yes Yes Yes for official No, for official acts. Otherwise, yes[58] official No, for official No No No No Yes No No Same sponsor as

International Organization Staff

acts. Yes, in all other cases

Support missions

staff

of Yes to

Yes

Yes

No,

for

acts. Yes, in all acts.

international organizations

other cases

Otherwise, yes