The U.S. Supreme Court Decision in the Case <i>Samantar v. Yousuf</i> and Immunities of Foreign Officials

Abstract

The article is devoted to the U.S. Supreme Court decision of June 1, 2010 in the case Samantar v. Yousuf, which authoritatively resolved the issue of the source of legal norms regulating the immunities of foreign officials in the U.S. law. Prior to the judgment, different federal courts of appeals gave different interpretation to the question, whether the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act applies to representatives of other States acting in their official capacity. As a result of this legal uncertainty, foreign governmental officers in U.S. courts received different treatment in terms of immunities in almost identical situations. The Supreme Court judgments being binding on all the lower U.S. courts, the case of the Somali general Mohamed Samantar provoked a vivid reaction in the country’s legal community, as well as in a number of foreign States. The article explains different legal views presented to the U.S. Supreme Courts by the lawyers of the petitioner, respondents, Government and third parties. It summarizes the argumentation by the Court and analyses the bearing that the June decision may have for the development of the U.S. law of immunities.

Keywords

• jurisdictional immunities
• foreign officials
• common law
• foreign head of state immunity