The Scope and Limitations of Immunities of Regional International Organizations: A Case Study of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization 
WANG Yaojie

School of Government Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, 201701;

Abstract: The immunity of international organizations constitutes one of the fundamental institutions in international law, with its theoretical foundation and practical modalities fundamentally distinct from state sovereign immunity. With the deepening of regional integration, regional international organizations have grown in both number and influence, and their immunity regimes have exhibited unique developmental trajectories. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), established as a new type of regional organization in the 21st century, positions China as both a founding member state and key leader, as well as the host state of its Secretariat. In matters of immunity, China assumes the dual role of institutional provider and responsibility balancer. This article takes the SCO immunity regime as its research subject, systematically analyzing the immunity provisions in the Charter of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the SCO, and the Headquarters Agreement. By comparing its similarities and differences with the immunity regimes of mature international organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union, this study reveals the scope and limitations of SCO immunities, identifies specific challenges in its normative framework, implementation mechanisms, and remedial procedures, and proposes recommendations for improvement in light of China's practical role as host state.

Keywords: Regional International Organizations; Immunities; Shanghai Cooperation Organization; Headquarters Agreement

References

[1] C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the Institutional Law of International Organizations, Cambridge University Press, 2005, p.315.

[2]Huang Deming, "A Comparative Study on the Theoretical Basis of the Privilege and Immunity System in Modern International Law," Law Review, No. 4, 2003.

[3]ICJ, Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, 1949.

[4]Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, "On the Relationship between International Organization Immunity and Sovereign Immunity," Chinese Journal of Law, No. 2, 2012.

[5]the same as above.

[6]Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, "International Organization Immunity as Seen from the IMF Managing Director Strauss-Kahn Case," Chinese Journal of Law, No. 5, 2011.

[7]Li Xiaotian, "New Developments of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Pioneering the 'SCO Model' of Regionalism," Russian, East European & Central Asian Studies, No. 3, 2018.

[8]Protocol (No 7) on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, pp. 266-272.

[9]Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, "On the Methods of Waiving International Organization Immunity," Chinese Journal of Law, No. 1, 2013.

[10]Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, "International Organization Immunity as Seen from the IMF Managing Director Strauss-Kahn Case," Chinese Journal of Law, No. 5, 2011.

[11]David Suter, “China Forging International Law: The SCO Experience”, The Diplomat, September 9, 2014.

[12]ECtHR, Waite and Kennedy v. Germany, Application No. 26083/94, 1999.

[13]Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, "On the Methods of Waiving International Organization Immunity," Chinese Journal of Law, No. 1, 2013.