CharonQC has recently reported that well-known Atheists (albeit the more accurate term is Rationalists) Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, with the aid of noted English lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson QC,
intend to have the Pope Benedict arrested at his upcoming visit to Great
Britain.
Not so fast, says Dapo Akande at EJIL: Talk! ,
who argues that the Pope is a Head of State and afforded state (or
sovereign) immunity from any charges of crimes against humanity:
“ However, this attempt to get the Pope arrested and
prosecuted in the UK has no chance of success as such an arrest would be
in violation of international law. Likewise, the proposed prosecution
by the International Criminal Court is most unlikely to get off the
ground and similarly flawed as a matter of international law. However,
these proposals raise some interesting issues of international law
surrounding the status of the Pope, the Vatican and the Holy See.
…
since
the Vatican is a State then the head of that State, the Pope, is
entitled to head of State immunity under international law. This
immunity is recognised by Section 20 of the UK’s State Immunity Act
which extends to “a sovereign or other head of State”, the same
immunities accorded to diplomats. These immunities are absolute in the
case of criminal proceedings. In other words there are no exceptions to
the immunity. The International Court of Justice’s decision in the Arrest Warrant Case (Congo v. Belgium)
2002 confirms that this type of immunity continues to apply even when
it is alleged that the head of State has committed international crimes.
So an allegation that the Pope may be responsible for crimes against
humanity will not suffice to defeat his immunity. It should be noted
that the immunity of a head of State from criminal prosecution in
foreign States is there for very good reasons. In the first place, those
State agents charged with the conduct of international relations are
given immunity in order to allow international relations and
international cooperation to continue to take place. Secondly, the
immunity of foreign heads of States assures that just as States may not
engage in regime change by armed force they may not achieve this end by
criminal prosecutions either. It respects the fundamental autonomy of
each State to determine who it is governed by.”
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Father John Michael George Father John Michael George • 10 hours ago
The above was stated in 2010
•
Responses « Back to index | View thread »