← Back to context

Comment by SideburnsOfDoom

12 years ago

> actions taken abroad aimed at non-US persons.

And there is an interesting counterpoint to that, e.g.

> "If the Americans eavesdropped on cellphones in Germany, they broke German law on German soil, and those responsible must be held accountable."

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/10/28/world/obama-unaw...

22 comments

SideburnsOfDoom

Reply
bradleyjg  12 years ago

The problem is that the people who were actually in Germany breaking German law were (likely) on diplomatic passports and so have plenary immunity. Meanwhile, under international law, which German courts take seriously even if US courts do not, senior state officials have functional immunity for actions taken in an official capacity with a disputed exception for violations of jus cogens+.

While there may be some room between the people on the ground who are immune and the senior officials who are immune to prosecute mid-level functionaries, that's not terribly satisfying and there still remains the problem of getting them in front of the court.

See generally: http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/10/the-nsa-affair-goes-crimi...

+The most serious types of international norms: things like genocide, slavery, torture, and piracy.

  • swombat  12 years ago

    Typically, if a diplomat constantly breaks the laws of the nation they're sent to in this manner, they get kicked out, and if the sender country in question keeps sending this sort of diplomat, the embassy would eventually be closed.

brown9-2  12 years ago

All espionage that Country A does in Country B is illegal in Country B. That's why it's espionage.

  • jlgreco  12 years ago

    You are missing the "and therefore there it is unreasonable for you to be upset" leap.

    Pointing out that illegal things are illegal isn't really a interesting contribution to the discussion, is it? I assume that wasn't all you meant to do.