By Haggai Carmon

An Israeli citizen sued UNTSO, (United Nations Truce Supervision Organization) in the Jerusalem Magistrate Court for damages resulting from bodily injuries he had suffered during his employment with UNTSO. The organization did not appear and the Plaintiff obtained a default. When the plaintiff tried to execute the judgment against UTSO’s assets in Israel, the Legal Advisor to the Government (roughly equivalent to the U.S Attorney General) appeared in court and asked to quash the execution proceedings. The Legal Advisor’s motion to dismiss was granted. On appeal to the Jerusalem District Court, the Court affirmed the dismissal.

The District Court indicated that the United Nation’s immunity in Israel is derived from several sources.

Article 105 of the U.N Charter:

“(1) the organization shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfillment of its purposes.”

Subsequently, the U.N adopted in 1946 the CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGE AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS.

Article 2 provides:

“The United Nations, its property and assets wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process except insofar as in any particular case it has expressly waived its immunity. It is, however, understood that no waiver of immunity shall extend to any measure of execution”. 

Article 3 provides:

 “The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whomever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscations, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action”.

 Israel adopted the U.N immunity rule even before it became a state and in 1949 joined the Convention.

The Israeli foreign minister was authorized by statute to order that the U.N shall be immune from all proceedings in Israel. Subsequently, his decree granted the U.N with absolute immunity “From any lawsuit and legal action.”

The Appeal Court agreed with the arguments of the Legal Advisor to the  Government.

“I also think that the State of Israel must subject itself to the provisions of a Convention it had signed, and respect the status and immunity of the U.N.

The Appeal Court further indicated that while the U.N may waive its immunity, its immunity from execution of judgment is absolute and cannot be waived, even by the U.N itself.