Double Standards in Immunity Policies

Published in Zao Bao
(Singapore) on 5 May 2010
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jake Curtis. Edited by Piotr Bielinski.
Big and small countries have less in common than just the differences in the size of their territory. Take the United States for example, a superpower no one dares to offend. If a foreigner with diplomatic immunity commits a crime on American soil, he must obey and be subjected to the laws of that land.

As a general rule of thumb though, legal cases involving foreign ambassadors seem to go through the motions, yet end up dodging any forms of prosecution.

But when one takes into account the statures of countries within the diplomatic arena, that rule gets heavily skewed. Take cases of car accidents involving foreign diplomats:

In 1997, a deputy ambassador from Georgia was driving under the influence in the United States. He killed one person and injured four others. The U.S government succeeded in waiving his diplomatic immunity and convicted him.

On the other hand, if an American with diplomatic immunity had committed a crime overseas, they would not be subject to local laws. In 2004, a U.S. Navy serviceman in Rome also drove while intoxicated, resulting in the unfortunate death of a civilian, but the U.S. did not agree to waive his diplomatic immunity. The case is gathering dust.

More recently, the same scenario happened in our country [Singapore], when a Romanian diplomat was involved in a tragic car accident that killed one and injured two others. The diplomat had already returned home when our government demanded that his diplomatic immunity be suspended, and thus far, not a word from his employer, even after our government filed charges against him. It seems Romania is sitting comfortably on the file, hoping it will soon be forgotten.

In these two cases, the large and small nation differences are apparent.
After the accident involving the Georgian deputy ambassador, the U.S. pressured the Georgian government and was successful in pushing for the diplomat to stand trial. Our country demanded that those involved in the Romanian diplomat's case return to Singapore to face public charges, but so far no one is paying attention. The opposition may think that our country is not capable and that we have no alternative but to accept the harsh realities of being a small country.

If those people who caused the accident in Singapore, which left one dead and two others injured, are not brought to justice and retain their diplomatic immunity, they escape legal action. Do international human rights organizations not have a stance?

For the family members of the victim in the unfortunate car accident in Rome, we express our deep concern and believe that a fair trial and justice will eventually come. Although [Singapore] is small, the mentality of its people and government is not weak. We also firmly believe that the law of the natural world, where the weak become fodder for the strong, belongs to the animal kingdom. We are not animals, and even though our country is small, if we reason well there will be no need to fear that justice will not be upheld.

Citizens must take a position against the government, akin to Zhang Yimou’s The Story of Qiu Ju, and must unceasingly investigate the legal liability of the Romanians who caused the accident. Maybe it will take one year, 10 years or even centuries, but we must not give up.

The Ministry of Education might as well consider adding this lesson to the national teaching materials. They must teach future generations to always strive for self-improvement and to never be afraid of the truth.


大国与小国
(2010-05-05)

大国与小国之别,除了国土面积的大小,其实也可从平时所发生的一些事件,而得以辨识。美国是个大国,而且是当今超级强国,谁都不敢轻易得罪。所以,即使享有豁免权的外交使节,在美国犯了事,伤害到了美国人,往往得乖乖接受美国法律的制裁。
 按一般的惯例,涉及外国使节的案件,似乎最终大多都是以敷衍了事。大国与小国的不同之处,也可从外交官涉及车祸的案例看到差别。比如1997年格鲁吉亚国的副使节,因在美国醉酒驾车,酿成一死四伤事件。美国政府就成功要求格鲁吉亚豁免肇祸使节的外交豁免权,并将其定罪。
  反过来说,如果享有豁免权的美国人在外国犯了事,却未必会受到当地法律的制裁。2004年一名美国海军人员在罗马,同样因醉酒驾车造成了一名罗马人不幸死亡,可美国就不同意豁免肇祸海军人员的豁免权。案件至今也许已无人记得。
  近来我国发生了一起涉及外国使节的车祸事件,不幸造成了一死两伤。事件发展至今,涉案的罗马尼亚使节已返国。随之我国政府对罗国肇祸人士提出了有关的指控,也对罗国政府呈交了相关的文件与证据。可至今却仍然无法获得罗国政府正面的回应。罗国给予我国人民的态度似乎是能拖就拖,日子久了就令人遗忘了。
  在以上两件事件中,我们可以意识到大国和小国的区别。美国在格鲁吉亚副使节伤害到美国人民后,向格国政府施压,并成功促使肇祸者在美国受审。我国在车祸事件上,要求涉案人士返回新加坡面对公开的指控,至今却不得相应的理会。对方也许认为,我国最终无法怎么样,无可奈何地接受作为小国的残酷现实。
  发生在新加坡的车祸,造成一死两伤,如果得不到正义的审判,而肇祸者又以所谓的豁免权,最终无需面对任何法律的制裁,国际人权组织对该事件不知是怎样的态度呢?对于罗国公使车祸事件中不幸遇难者的家属,除了表达深切的关怀,我们深信,公正的审判和正义的伸张会到来的。我国虽小,但国民与政府的心态不弱。我们也深信弱肉强食,是属于动物界的自然规则。我们不是动物,所以国家虽小,但只要有理就不怕正义得不到伸张。国民与政府将会以秋菊打官司的心态,不断与罗国肇祸者追究相关的法律责任。也许是一年、十年、甚至百年,我们都不会放弃。
  教育部不妨考虑将这起事件编入教材,教导后人自强不息,有理就不怕的道理。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Taiwan: Taiwan’s Leverage in US Trade Talks

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Canada: Canada’s Retaliatory Tariffs Hurt Canadians

Topics

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: Three Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – but When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Related Articles

Singapore: Trump’s America Brings More Chaos, but Not Necessarily More Danger

Singapore: No Ukraine Cease-fire – Putin Has Called Trump’s Bluff

Singapore: Lessons from the Trump-Zelenskyy Meltdown – for Friends and Foes

Singapore: In Trump and Musk’s America, Echoes of China’s Past Emerge