This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/08/dominic-raab-urges-us-to-reconsider-anne-sacoolas-immunity

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Harry Dunn death: Anne Sacoolas's husband 'not registered as diplomat' Harry Dunn death: Foreign Office doubt Anne Sacoolas will return to UK
(about 4 hours later)
The husband of the American woman granted immunity following a fatal car crash in the UK was not registered as a diplomat, an expert in diplomatic law has said. The Foreign Office appears increasingly pessimistic that the wife of a US intelligence officer will return to the UK to answer questions about her role in a fatal car crash, as legal experts challenged claims she was entitled to full diplomatic immunity.
Mark Stephens said Jonathan Sacoolas, the husband of Anne Sacoolas, was not on the official diplomatic list, meaning he and his dependants may not be allowed the same level of protection from prosecution by claiming diplomatic immunity. US state department officials, in both private and public exchanges, have expressed regret about the death of motorcyclist Harry Dunn, 19, outside an RAF base used by the US air force but said it was global American policy not to issue immunity waivers in such cases.
Stephens said the Foreign Office had confirmed this to him. The FCO was not immediately able to comment. Before she left the UK, Anne Sacoolas had been helping British police with their inquiries into the 27 August collision between Dunn’s motorcycle and her Volvo XC90 near RAF Croughton, in Northamptonshire. They believed she had driven on the wrong side of the road for 400 metres after leaving the base.
Stephens said Jonathan Sacoolas was not on the London diplomatic list, and as a result the level of immunity his wife could claim over a British teenager’s death in the collision was far more limited. The Foreign Office insisted her husband, Jonathan Sacoolas, had full diplomatic immunity under the Vienna convention, even though his name was not included in the US diplomatic list, according to an expert in diplomatic law.
The US has already transferred the entire family back to the US after her alleged role in the death of 19-year-old Harry Dunn in a fatal crash. UK diplomats said that list was a far from exhaustive register of those capable of claiming full diplomatic immunity, and the RAF Croughton base where Jonathan Sacoolas had worked was treated as an annex of the US embassy.
Dunn died after his motorcycle collided with a Volvo XC90, allegedly driven by Anne Sacoolas, near RAF Croughton in Northamptonshire on 27 August. It is alleged the Volvo driver drove 400 yards down the wrong side of the road after pulling out of the airbase. Boris Johnson has said Sacoolas should face justice in the UK, saying: “I do not think that it can be right to use the process of diplomatic immunity for this type of purpose.”
The decision to transfer the family back to the US has prompted public outrage and a commitment by Boris Johnson to urge Donald Trump to lift diplomatic immunity so Anne Sacoolas can return to face justice in the UK. The prime minister has promised to raise the issue with Donald Trump if the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, was unable to make progress in persuading the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, to make Sacoolas return to the UK to face police questioning.
US staff, including civilian staff and their dependents, at designated military bases in the UK, including RAF Croughton, are protected under the Visiting Forces Act 1952, reinforced by further legislation in 1964. They are able to claim some legal immunity in the UK.
Diplomatic immunity is the protection given under international and UK law to foreign diplomats and their families. It was formalised through the 1961 Vienna convention on diplomatic relations (VCDR). Reciprocal global agreements also protect UK diplomats working abroad.Diplomatic immunity is the protection given under international and UK law to foreign diplomats and their families. It was formalised through the 1961 Vienna convention on diplomatic relations (VCDR). Reciprocal global agreements also protect UK diplomats working abroad.
Without a foreign state agreeing to lift immunity, diplomats and their dependent families can only be detained “as a last resort” if, for example, they are deemed to be a danger to others or themselves. The only other sanction available to the Foreign Office would be to order their expulsion.Without a foreign state agreeing to lift immunity, diplomats and their dependent families can only be detained “as a last resort” if, for example, they are deemed to be a danger to others or themselves. The only other sanction available to the Foreign Office would be to order their expulsion.
When a foreign state agrees to remove that legal protection, it is known as a “waiver of immunity”. Individual diplomats cannot do so; the embassy of the foreign state has to make a formal request.When a foreign state agrees to remove that legal protection, it is known as a “waiver of immunity”. Individual diplomats cannot do so; the embassy of the foreign state has to make a formal request.
As well as covering diplomats and their families anywhere in the UK, the same convention and legislation prevents UK officials from entering diplomatic premises. That inviolability enabled Julian Assange to stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for seven years. As well as covering diplomats and their families anywhere in the UK, the same convention and legislation prevents UK officials from entering diplomatic premises. That inviolability enabled Julian Assange to stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for seven years. 
Owen Bowcott, Legal affairs correspondentOwen Bowcott, Legal affairs correspondent
Broadly, UK courts do not have primary jurisdiction where the offence “arose out of and in the course of the service personnel’s duties as a member of the visiting force”. At issue is the definition of the phrase “course of duty”. Raab did raise the case with Pompeo on Monday night. He was also due to have further contact with US diplomats on Tuesday.
The US air force as a matter of principle maintains that its service personnel remain on duty while travelling between their base station and home address. This might cover Anne Sacoolas’s intended destination. Mark Stephens, an acknowledged legal expert on diplomatic immunity law, challenged whether Jonathan Sacoolas enjoyed full immunity under the Vienna convention, saying he had not been registered as such with the foreign office.
If this was the case, the US would produce a section 11 legal certificate stating an individual had immunity from prosecution in UK courts. He suggested Sacoolas and his dependents instead only had more limited immunity under the Visiting Forces Act, and its derivative bilateral orders that provide immunity to personnel on specific UK bases. That immunity, according to Crown Prosecution Service guidance, is restricted to specific offences that “arose out of and in the course of the service person’s duties as a member of the visiting force including whether act occurred in the course of the individual’s professional duties”.
However, CPS guidance on the issue of service personnel on UK roads states: “Such cases should be looked at carefully to see if this is sustainable. In appropriate cases where evidence to rebut this status is available (eg a long break in the journey/significant diversion from most direct route) consideration should be given to challenging a section 11 certificate issued by the service authority.” The US air force has in the past, according to the CPS, interpreted professional duties to include driving from an air base to a home address. The Sacoolas family was reportedly living on the base, which would mean they could not claim that defence.
The visiting force then has to produce a certificate setting out why the individual was carrying out professional duties. Normally a waiver is issued, but on the condition of a commitment that the individual will be tried in their own national court. Offering to speak to the grieving family, Stephens said: “The bilateral treaty doesn’t bind Northamptonshire police and it does not bind the family of this poor boy who was deceased, and as a consequence of that they can apply for her extradition to come back to face manslaughter charges.”
The lawyer’s claim came as the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, urged the US government to reconsider its decision to grant diplomatic immunity to Anne Sacoolas. He said the family had a right to sue Anne Sacoolas outside the UK jurisdiction and suggested the US had tried to get the intelligence officer out of the country to keep his identity secret, a tactic that had backfired: “If she had gone to court in the UK, probably no one would have known about him.”
Great speaking with #UK Foreign Secretary @DominicRaab. We discussed our intentions to negotiate an ambitious future free trade agreement, ways to counter #Iran’s malign influence in the Middle East, and Turkey’s plans to potentially invade Syria. Charlotte Charles, Dunn’s mother, insisted in interviews broadcast on Tuesday that the family would not cease its efforts to seek justice for her son, including changes to the way in which diplomatic immunity was interpreted in the UK. She said they were raising funds to take their case to the US.
The FCO said Raab had reiterated his disappointment at the sudden return to the US of Sacoolas and her family, and urged the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, to reconsider his decision. Charles said: “We are hoping that with Boris [Johnson] now clearly on his side and saying that he also feels it is not right, we are very much hoping that over the next couple of days things will improve for us and it will help our fight to get some justice done.
Pompeo, in a tweet about the phone call, made no mention of the exchange, but in a longer official statement said the two men had discussed the death of Harry Dunn. “And also we are hoping that it will help change this for the future. We are doing this because Harry would want to fight for what he believed in. And we need to fight for change.
The call also covered the US decision to allow Turkey to send troops into northern Syria, a future trade deal, the Iran nuclear deal and the democracy protests in Hong Kong, suggesting the immunity case would have fought for space in a crowded agenda. “It is going to take quite a long time to come to terms. The part that I struggle to understand [is] why she took the decision to leave, why she felt it was the right thing to go.”
Raab has also already made his displeasure known about the Sacoolas case to the US ambassador to the UK, Woody Johnson. Charles said that understanding would only come when “we have a chance to meet her and for her to talk about it, see her remorse”.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday, Charlotte Charles, Harry Dunn’s mother, again appealed for Sacoolas to return to the UK, adding it was not right for diplomatic immunity to be used in such cases. The motorcyclist’s father, Tim Dunn, added: “She knew Harry had died, she had been told that, and what I really struggle to understand is if you knew that you have killed somebody, you think it is right thing to flee the country.”
She said she had received thousands of messages of support, mainly from the UK and the US, over the past 24 hours, saying “they were devastated for us and and disgusted this woman has been allowed to leave the UK”. The US state department’s own guidelines for law enforcement officials make it clear that the US does not believe diplomatic immunity extends to foreign diplomats committing serious or repeat driving offences in the US, either while under the influence of alcohol or not.
She added that “with Boris now clearly – bless him – on our side and saying yesterday he feels that it is not right, I am very much hoping over the next couple of days things will improve for us and we will get some justice done”. Sacoolas, who reportedly had her 12-year-old son in the car when the crash happened, was spoken to by police the day after the crash, and initially said she had no plans to leave the UK.
The US Department of State’s own guidelines for law enforcement officials make it clear that the US does not believe diplomatic immunity extends to foreign diplomats committing serious or repeat driving offences in the US, either under the influence of alcohol or sober. Police officers became aware immunity was an issue because her husband was a diplomat and applied to the US embassy for a waiver to allow them to question her.
The handbook states: “Drivers who demonstrate a pattern of bad driving habits or who commit an egregious offense such as Driving While Under the Influence are subject to having their licenses suspended or revoked as appropriate.” But they were later informed the waiver had been refused and Sacoolas had left the country.
It adds that US state department policy is to assign “points” for driving infractions and to suspend the licence of foreign mission personnel who “abuse the privilege of driving in the United States by repeatedly committing traffic violations and demonstrating unsafe driving practices”.
While calling for diplomats to be treated with respect, the handbook states: “Foreign diplomats who violate traffic laws should be cited. Allegations of serious crimes should be fully investigated, promptly reported to the the US Department of State, and procedurally developed to the maximum permissible extent.”
Foreign policyForeign policy
Trump administrationTrump administration
US foreign policyUS foreign policy
newsnews
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content