Comment by Terry A. O'Neill
With the Diplomatic Relations Act of 1978, Congress has drawn the United States law of diplomatic immunity into the twentieth century. The Act, which became effective on December 31, 1978, incorporates the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and supersedes a preexisting federal statute on diplomatic immunity that had remained unaltered for nearly two hundred years. The Vienna Convention's provisions represent in some measure a codification of the law of diplomatic relations as it had evolved in various countries; in part, the Convention also created an entirely new international law of diplomatic relations. The Convention establishes uniform rules and procedures for the accreditation of diplomatic envoys and the establishment of diplomatic missions in receiving States, and sets forth prohibitions against the exercise of jurisdiction by receiving States over missions and individual members of missions. More specifically, the Convention details the scope and applicability of diplomatic immunity for three classes of diplomatic personnel and their families. In doing so, it narrows the scope of immunity for a substantial number of such personnel.
The Convention by no means does away with diplomatic immunity, however; in many cases, bona fide plaintiffs will still have no legal recourse against diplomats for their tortious acts. Thus, where a diplomat is at fault in an automobile accident, his immunity can still mean financial ruin for an innocent victim. For this reason, in addition to incorporating the Vienna Convention into United States law, the Diplomatic Relations Act requires all diplomats to purchase automobile liability insurance, and provides injured parties with a right of direct action against the diplomat's insurer. In this fashion, the Act attempts to provide relief for accident victims without disturbing the immunity accorded to diplomats under the Vienna Convention. But the Act is not entirely successful, its failure due largely to the Vienna Convention's scheme of immunity. This comment will discuss the infirmities in the current law of diplomatic immunity and demonstrate, in light of these infirmities, Congress's failure to improve the lot of automobile accident victims through mandatory insurance requirements.
About the Author
Terry A. O'Neill.
Citation
54 Tul. L. Rev. 661 (1980)