A Study of Diplomatic Intervention in the Implementation of the
Foreign State Immunities Act
Weiyu Liu
Guangzhou Ullian International School, Guangdong, China
Keywords: Foreign State Immunity Law, Diplomatic Intervention, Limitation of Intervention.
Abstract: The diplomatic intervention has become a tool in the lawsuit of state immunity, the study of the limits of
diplomatic intervention is very necessary, excessive diplomatic intervention will bring about the damage to
the interests of the individual, affecting the independence of the judiciary judgment as well as making China's
international image damaged and other risks, China should set the limits of diplomatic intervention, and the
limits of diplomatic intervention should be set. Excessive diplomatic intervention may bring risks such as
damage to personal interests, independence of judicial judgment and China's international image, etc. China
should set up a system of “three trials in one”, construct a hierarchical legal system and set up a risk assessment
system to solve the above risks.
1 INTRODUCTION
The Fifth Meeting of the Standing Committee of the
Fourteenth National People's Congress adopted the
Law of the People's Republic of China on Foreign
State Immunity on September 1, 2023, which came
into effect from January 2024 onwards. The Foreign
State Immunity Law clarifies that China's diplomatic
immunity policy has shifted from absolute immunity
to restricted immunity (Li, 2023). The principle of
limited immunity is based on the acts of foreign
governments divided into two categories, Sovereign
Acts (e.g., diplomatic, military) and Non-Sovereign
Acts (e.g., commercial investment, trade), and
correspondingly, foreign state property is divided into
Sovereign Property (such as embassy buildings,
military equipment) and Commercial Property (such
as investment funds, trade commodities), when a
foreign government engaged in acts of sovereignty
acts involving sovereign property, other countries
may not use jurisdiction over it, On the contrary,
when a foreign government engages in acts involving
non-sovereign acts and commercial property, other
countries can apply to their courts (Li, 2023).
Diplomatic intervention refers to a state's efforts to
protect its interests by influencing the course of
justice in a state immunity proceeding through formal
diplomatic means such as diplomatic statements,
debates and protests. In recent years, law has
increasingly become the most authoritative and
effective central tool for governments to deal with
national interests and public affairs, resulting in a
gradual increase in the proportion of the legal system
of each country that is directly related to political
activities, (transnational commercial disputes and
litigation over the execution of overseas assets will
lead to diplomatic involvement, which has resulted in
the gradual blurring of the boundaries between the
legal process and diplomacy (Yang, 2024;Fan, 2024).
Some scholars believe that, as a rule, the handling
of foreign relations affairs falls within the scope of
responsibilities of the diplomatic service, and
therefore, state immunity litigation is vulnerable to
changes in foreign relations (Whether for absolute or
limited immunity, the foreign relations of the forum
state have a certain degree of influence on the practice
of justice (Sun, 2021;Fan, 2024). Such as the
jurisdiction of a foreign state or the execution of its
property judicial acts are prone to diplomatic disputes
or even incur retaliation thus showing that diplomatic
involvement in the implementation of justice has two
sides, can rely on it to safeguard the legitimate rights
and interests of the State may also cause a conflict of
interest between the countries (He, 2020). This paper
takes China's Foreign State Immunity Law as the base
point, and through the literature research method, in
the main part, through researching and combing
different literature about China's Foreign State
Immunity Law and diplomatic intervention, clarifies
Liu, W.
A Study of Diplomatic Intervention in the Implementation of the Foreign State Immunities Act.
DOI: 10.5220/0014384600004859
Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science (ICPLSS 2025), pages 465-470
ISBN: 978-989-758-785-6
Proceedings Copyright © 2026 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda.
465

the role of diplomatic intervention in the State
Immunity Law, and summarizes the possible impacts
of over- and under-exposure to diplomatic
intervention, and the case study method, through
selecting representative international cases about
Foreign State Immunity Law, and summarizes the
role of diplomatic intervention in the case. By
selecting representative international cases on the
Foreign State Immunity Act, analyzing and
summarizing the specific forms of diplomatic
intervention in the cases and their impact on the
judgments, and drawing out the actual effectiveness
of diplomatic intervention in immunity litigation, the
problems brought about by diplomatic intervention in
the implementation of the State Immunity Act will be
explored and summarized, and relevant
recommendations will be given.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Around the issue of diplomatic intervention in the
implementation of China's Foreign State Immunity
Law, some scholars have proposed that, by clarifying
the procedure, content and effectiveness of
diplomatic intervention, and promoting its
complementarity with civil litigation, so that it is both
sovereignty maintenance and judicial effectiveness.
This can not only in the state immunity lawsuit to
protect foreign relations and legitimate rights and
interests, can also enhance China's national
international legal discourse, but also for other areas
of administrative intervention mechanism to provide
a model (Fan, 2024).
Other scholars have suggested that if the issue of
foreign state immunity is left entirely to the foreign
affairs department to resolve, it will result in the
foreign affairs department being subjected to
excessive pressure from foreign countries; on the
contrary, after the Chinese courts accept the case, it
will to a certain extent help the diplomatic
negotiation, and the individuals and enterprises may
also be able to influence the diplomatic relations
through the litigation. In addition, the diplomatic
service plays a decisive role in the determination of
foreign states in state immunity litigation, diplomatic
service, and other factual issues of state action, and
also plays a role in other events concerning major
national interests that should not be underestimated
(Li, 2023) .In addition, other scholars have further
proposed that China's Foreign State Immunity Law is
a special law with the composite attributes of justice
and diplomacy, which adjusts China's long-standing
Absolute Immunity Doctrine” by systematically
regulating the issue of foreign state immunity. The
law covers both legal and political issues, so it is
essential to further clarify the relationship between
the implementation of the Foreign State Immunity
Law and the Foreign Relations Law, the Civil
Procedure Law and other relevant laws (Tang, 2024).
Based on this, this study argues that existing
studies discuss the inevitability and risks of
diplomatic intervention but lack the exploration of the
limits of intervention, therefore, this report will
explore the different issues that diplomatic
intervention brings to the implementation of the
Foreign State Immunity Act.
3 THE IMMUNITY REGIME
3.1 Current Situation of Diplomatic
Immunity Policy
3.1.1 The Formation of the Immunity
System and Its Development in the
International Arena
The immunity system originated in the 19th century,
by the Anglo-American countries through case law
established the absolute immunity system that all the
acts and property of a state are not subject to
jurisdiction in another country (Huang, 1978). This
principle was also endorsed by most countries.
However, after the 1950s, with the frequent
participation of many countries in international civil
and commercial activities, the state in order to better
safeguard the interests of their own country began to
shift from absolute immunity to restrictive immunity,
that is, the acts and property of the state according to
the Sovereignty and Non-Sovereignty to make a
distinction, so as to make it clear that only the
Sovereignty and Non-Sovereignty of the state. In
order to better safeguard the interests of the state, the
state began to shift from absolute immunity to limited
immunity, that is, the acts of the state and property
according to the Sovereign Act and Non-Sovereign
act to make a distinction, so as to make it clear that
only the sovereign act of the immunity, and vice
versa, non-sovereign act is no longer immunity
(Tang, 2024). At the international level, the European
Convention on State Immunity formulated by the
Council of Europe in 1972 and the United Nations
Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States
and Their Property formulated by the United Nations
in 2004 can embody the principle of limitation of
immunity, although the latter did not enter into force
but still obtained the ratification of a number of
ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science
466

countries, so the limitation of immunity system to
become the mainstream trend of the present
day.(Gong, 2005).
3.1.2 The Turning toward the Principle of
Limiting Immunity and the
Institutional Setting in China
The development of the immunity regime in China
can be summarized as a shift from adherence to the
absolute immunity regime to the emergence of the
principle of permissible exceptions to the limitation
of immunity doctrine (Qi, 2015). China's early
adherence to absolute immunity doctrine, influenced
by historical, cultural and economic development
factors, held that foreign states enjoyed absolute
immunity in Chinese courts and did not support
Chinese state-owned enterprises' claims for state
immunity (Tang, 2024). However, as the mainstream
international trend shifted, China began to adjust its
policies along with it, and it has embodied the
position of limiting the principle of immunity through
individual legislations and diplomatic practices, such
as the 1992 Law on the Territorial Sea and the
Contiguous Zone, the 2005 Law on Immunity from
Judicial Coercive Measures for the Properties of the
Central Bank of a Foreign State and the interpretation
of the relevant articles of the Basic Law of Hong
Kong in 2011, which involve the principle and stance
of the state immunity. principles and positions. In
addition, China has signed the United Nations
Convention on State Immunity and has reflected its
support for limiting immunity in international treaties
in the field of ships and aircraft (Tang, 2024).
Eventually, China formulated and promulgated the
Law on State Immunity of Foreign States, which
established China's shift from the principle of
absolute immunity to the principle of restricted
immunity.
China's limited immunity system is mainly
reflected in the Foreign State Immunity System,
which refers to the exclusive institutional design of
civil disputes arising from foreign states and their
property based on specific rules to clarify that the
court will not grant jurisdiction in general or will
grant jurisdiction in specific cases (Bulletin of the
Standing Committee of the National People's
Congress, 2023). The system, under the umbrella of
the Constitution, has constructed a complete legal
system that is guided by the Foreign Relations Law
and the Civil Procedure Law, which provide the
principles of state immunity from lawsuits relating to
diplomatic and judicial attributes, and centered
around the Foreign State Immunity Law, which
provides the legal basis for dealing with cases of
immunity designed for foreign states and their
property, and is supplemented by other laws. system
(Tang, 2024). This system makes it clear that the
jurisdiction of Chinese courts in dealing with
commercial disputes between citizens, enterprises
and foreign states will be based on judicial settlement
(Tang, 2024). In addition, the Foreign State Immunity
Law also stipulates the principle that foreign states
and their property enjoy immunity in China as well as
the exceptions to immunity jurisdiction.
3.1.3 Academic Controversies on Diplomatic
Intervention
Diplomatic intervention is now a tool to assist in
diplomatic immunity litigation, but many scholars
have different ideas about it. Some scholars believe
that the courts need to make decisions in accordance
with the uniform provisions of the law, while the
diplomatic department needs to consider the political
and diplomatic relations in the case, and the state
immunity lawsuit will involve complex and sensitive
foreign affairs, if China lacks the appropriate
measures to deal with it may be in an unfavorable
position in the international community (Yin,
2011;Fan, 2024). In addition, through the applicable
legal rules to deal with foreign relations affairs, can
effectively prevent judicial disputes between the
parties and the defendant foreign countries to rise to
international political conflicts (Cai, 2015).
In addition to this, there are scholars who believe
that the current institutional framework of the Foreign
State Immunity Act is insufficiently adapted to the
international political-diplomatic and economic
environment in which China currently finds itself,
and that the use of diplomatic intervention as a tool
for immunity from lawsuits will bring unnecessary
diplomatic disputes to China (Fan, 2024). The
opponents argue that by defining the legal
procedures, scope of application and legal effects of
diplomatic intervention, can build a synergistic
mechanism with civil litigation, so that it can serve
the dual functions of sovereignty protection and
judicial effectiveness. This can not only in the state
immunity litigation in the appropriate handling of
foreign relations can also effectively safeguard the
legitimate rights and interests, but also to enhance
China's international legal discourse, but also for
other areas of the executive power and judicial power
interface system provides a model for innovation
(Fan, 2024). In addition, China's diplomatic organs in
the state immunity litigation, foreign countries
recognized, cross-border service of judicial
A Study of Diplomatic Intervention in the Implementation of the Foreign State Immunities Act
467

documents and other issues of state behavior plays a
decisive role in other events on the major interests of
the country cannot be ignored (Li, 2023).
3.2 Functions and Risks of Diplomatic
Intervention in State Immunity
Litigation
3.2.1 Functions of Diplomatic Intervention
Diplomatic intervention in state immunity litigation
has multiple functions, mainly reflected in the
maintenance of national interests, improving the
structure of the litigation and improving judicial
transparency and fairness and other aspects. First of
all, diplomatic intervention has the function of Filling
in the Gaps of the litigation structure, state immunity
usually involves the jurisdiction of foreign-related
civil litigation, private international law and the
conflict between private interests (Fan, 2024). In such
cases, diplomatic intervention, through the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, can provide the court with
opinions and information about the background of the
case to help the court to understand the case more
fully and ensure that the court makes a fairer
judgment.
Secondly, diplomatic intervention can enhance
the transparency and openness of litigation. By
publicizing diplomatic opinions and policy
statements, the court can obtain more information
about the case, thus making the litigation process
more transparent and ensuring that the interests of all
parties are fully protected, thus improving the fairness
of the litigation decision.
3.2.2 Risks of Diplomatic Intervention
Diplomatic intervention in immunity litigation will
also bring some risks, such as personal interests will
be damaged, for example, a Chinese enterprise in the
development of foreign countries to sue the local
government but because of the need to maintain
diplomatic relations between the two countries and
was forced to withdraw the case, the diplomatic
intervention may lead to damage to the interests of
individuals. In addition, there is also the risk of over-
interference in diplomatic intervention, as over-
reliance on diplomatic opinions may affect the
independence of judicial judgment and damage
China's international image. In addition, there is the
risk of procedural opacity, there are many sensitive
information that China does not have the relevant
provisions to indicate that can be made public, such
as the foreign affairs departments and foreign
embassies in China and the request for reports,
opinions and briefings system of this type of
information, if the diplomatic opinion and evidence
of the material is not made public. It is difficult for
the courts to make fair judgments based on fully
transparent materials and for the parties concerned to
recognize them, which may lead to further
complications in foreign relations matters (Fan,
2023).
4 FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR
OPTIMIZING DIPLOMATIC
INVOLVEMENT IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
FOREIGN STATE IMMUNITIES
ACT
4.1 The Need for Research on the
Limits of Diplomacy
Although diplomatic intervention in state immunity
litigation is a useful way to regulate sovereignty and
judicial conflicts, the risk of abuse of diplomatic
intervention should not be ignored. It may trigger the
weakening of judicial authority, instrumentalization
of law, damage to China's international image and
escalation of sovereignty conflicts. Therefore, in
order to adapt to the complexity of cross-border
disputes in the digital age, China needs to build a
“three-in-one” review mechanism to prevent the risk
of Instrumentalization of Immunity.
The first review is the review of diplomatic
necessity. Led by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the
diplomatic department to assess the risk value of
diplomatic intervention, focusing on the review of the
lawsuit involves significant national interests, the
review needs to be submitted to the necessity of
diplomatic intervention report and intervention
program to avoid unnecessary diplomatic conflicts
with other countries, incurring retaliation.
The second trial, judicial feasibility review. Led
by the International Commercial Court of the
Supreme Court, the court needs to review the validity
of the supporting documents provided by the
diplomatic department and focus on whether the
diplomatic intervention breaks through the legal
boundaries of the Foreign State Immunity Act.
The third trial, international compliance review.
The expert members of international law will argue
and examine whether the intervention is in line with
international customary law, such as the United
ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science
468

Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of
States and Their Property. The expert commissioner
is required to issue a report on the legal compliance
of diplomatic intervention.
4.2 Domestic Responses
With regard to the potential risks posed by diplomatic
intervention in State immunity litigation, China can
build a risk prevention and control system from the
following points.
First, the construction of a Layered Progressive
legal support system, in the Foreign State Immunity
Act to clarify the legal boundaries of diplomatic
intervention, such as prohibiting diplomatic
intervention can directly interfere with the outcome
of the legal decision examples of the types of cases
prohibited diplomatic intervention in order to avoid
the excessive use of diplomatic intervention.
Second, the innovation of judicial and diplomatic
coordination mechanism, the establishment of a
special department to deal with the coordinated
review of immunity cases, members of the
department consists of representatives of the People's
Supreme Court and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to provide advice to
the court but the final judgment is carried out by the
court to avoid excessive interference in the judiciary
by the diplomatic sector.
Third, improve the risk assessment mechanism.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of
Commerce have established a risk assessment system
to conduct comprehensive risk assessments based on
diplomatic relations with the country involved in the
case, the level of the rule of law and the sensitivity of
the case. In addition, cultivate professionals who are
proficient in international law and foreign affairs, and
improve China's ability to defend itself in immunity
cases so as to better safeguard China's interests.
4.3 International Countermeasures
In order to properly deal with the risks posed by
diplomatic intervention, at the international level,
first of all, the country needs to build a regional
immunity cooperation network. Nowadays, there is a
lack of regional cooperation consensus on state
immunity litigation, China can promote the Asian and
African countries to adopt a treaty to unify the scope
of application of diplomatic intervention, the rules
and effectiveness of diplomatic intervention in order
to avoid the use of different ways to avoid the use of
different countries brought about by the conflict of
diplomatic intervention can also avoid too much
interference in the implementation of justice.
Secondly, the ratification process of the United
Nations Convention on State Immunity should be
promoted. This Convention has been formulated for
many years, but has not been widely recognized,
China should promote more countries to agree to this
Convention in order to help build a unified rule of law
on state immunity, which can also enhance China's
international discourse, to maintain China's image of
advocating the rule of law society.
Finally, China needs to innovate dispute
resolution measures for immunity. The introduction
of a more neutral mechanism for the consideration of
cases, in order to balance the diplomatic views, when
the case involves public international law, should be
transferred to the ICJ to adjudicate, because the
decision is internationally binding, which can also
avoid diplomatic conflicts.
5 CONCLUSION
This paper adopts the literature research method and
case study method to study the possible risks of
diplomatic intervention in the Foreign State
Immunity Act and summarizes several major risks of
diplomatic intervention and the necessity of research
on the limits of diplomatic intervention.
The risks of diplomatic intervention in the
implementation of state immunity are as follows,
diplomatic intervention may lead to the damage of
personal interests. Diplomatic involvement can also
lead to diplomatic disputes which can lead to
retaliation. In addition, over-reliance on the use of
diplomatic intervention may damage China's
international image and weaken the image of China
as an advocate of a legalized society. Therefore,
China's response to the risks posed by diplomatic
intervention has the following optimization direction,
China should clarify the limits of diplomatic
intervention, prohibit diplomatic intervention can
directly affect the verdict. In addition, in order to
avoid retaliation behavior diplomatic department
should be open and transparent use of supporting
documents to reduce the other countries accused us of
backroom operation, at the same time in the
diplomatic intervention should be carried out in
advance before the risk assessment. Diplomatic
intervention in the immunity lawsuit should try to use
when diplomatic relations are facing major risks, in
cases involving public international law should be
transferred to the ICJ trial judgment, in order to avoid
damage to our international image.
All in all, diplomatic intervention has two sides,
A Study of Diplomatic Intervention in the Implementation of the Foreign State Immunities Act
469

China should reasonably use diplomatic intervention
to more effectively protect our interests.
REFERENCES
Comparative Study of State Immunity - A Common Issue
in Contemporary Public International Law, Private
International Law and International Economic Law.
2005. Beijing University Press.
Fan, X.L. 2024. On the Mechanism Arrangement of
Diplomatic Intervention in State Immunity Litigation.
Journal of Anhui University (Philosophy and Society
Edition) (5): 98-111.
He, Q. 2020. The Hague Judgments Convention and the
Recognition and Enforcement of State-related
Judgments. Global Law Review (3): 147-161.
Huang, J. 1978. A Study on the Immunity of States and
Their Property. China University of Political Science
and Law Press.
Li, Q. 2023. On the Restricted Immunity System of China's
Foreign State Immunity Law. International Law Studies
(5): 28-55.
Qi, J. 2015. Research on State Immunity Legislation.
People’s Publishing House.
Sun, A. 2021. Study on the Legal Application of State
Immunity Cases: In the Complex Context of Justice and
Diplomacy. International Law Studies (2): 3-43.
Tang, Y. 2024. Important Issues Requiring Attention in the
Understanding and Application of the Foreign State
Immunities Act. International Law Studies (6): 23-40.
Yang, P. 2024. Transnational Judicial Dialog in
International Rule of Law and China’s Response.
Journal of Anhui University (Philosophy & Society)
(1): 109-118.
Yin, X. 2011. State Sovereign Immunity under the
Perspective of One Country, Two Systems: Divergence
and Harmonization. Dongyue Lunshang (11).
ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science
470