"When Vladimir Putin met with Donald Trump in Alaska in August, one prominent strand of social-media commentary had nothing to do with the possibility of a deal to end Russia's war against Ukraine (the meeting's ostensible purpose). Rather, it turned on the question of whether Putin-who faces an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court, stemming from Russia's wartime actions-could conceivably be arrested when he stepped foot on U.S. soil."
"As a practical matter, of course, the answer was no-it wouldn't happen, and not just because the Trump administration had no interest in making an arrest, or because the Russian reaction would be dangerous, or because the United States is not a member of the ICC. As a legal matter, most countries treat a serving national leader-a president, a prime minister, a king; whether its own or that of some other country-as having complete immunity from the jurisdiction of their national courts."
Vladimir Putin met with Donald Trump in Alaska, prompting discussion about whether Putin, who faces an ICC arrest warrant for wartime actions, could be arrested on U.S. soil. Practically, such an arrest would not occur because the U.S. government lacked interest, Russian reaction could be dangerous, and the United States is not an ICC member. Most countries grant serving national leaders complete immunity from national court jurisdiction, defined as an exemption from legal duties and liabilities. Serving leaders with personal immunity cannot be arrested, detained, or judged. Questions persist about arresting and trying former leaders accused of international crimes, and international jurisprudence has trended away from blanket immunity.
Read at The Atlantic
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]