- Tytuł:
- Nietykalność posła w Rzymie okresu pryncypatu
- Autorzy:
- Longchamps de Bérier, Franciszek
- Powiązania:
- https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/660932.pdf
- Data publikacji:
- 1994
- Wydawca:
- Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
- Opis:
- An envoy (legatus, orator) was a person sent to a community or to a ruler by his community or his state. It was not only an individual who undertook the mission to foreign territories or came from them to Rome, but the delegate to or from provincial assemblies, municipium or civitas as well. The complete inviolability of envoys seems to be warranted in Rome of the principate era by the univerasally respected norm of ius gentium. According to it, envoys were regarded as sacred (sancti habentur legati). Therefore, they were secured against violance and safe from human trespass or assault. The priviledge was enjoyed by both ambassadors of the senate or the princeps and legates arriving to Rome from abroad, from provincial assemblies, from municipia or civitates. The word sanctum comes from the sagmina - the bunches of herbs. The legates customarily carried them as it was believed that the sagmina provide them with gods’ support, ward off outrages and protect them from human mischief. According to lex Iulia de vi publica, an attack, a battery or any other violation of the personal immunity of envoys or of accompaning individuals was punished by aquae et ignis interdictio. An assault made upon an enemy envoy was considered the aggraviated form of the offence. According to the Quintus Mucius Scaevola’s responsum from D .50.7.18, the person, who committed such crime, was punished by deditio: he was handed over to the enemy, who had sent the struck legates. The procedures of envoys’ nomination differred and depended on particular habits and laws of certain territories and communities. However according to Roman law, a person sent as a legate enjoyed complete inviolability by the time from when he was selected, not by that when he began his mission. In case of disagreement whether or not he was a legate, the pretor at Rome took the cognizance of the issue. Consequently, a person not recognized by the Roman official did not enjoy the envoy’s priviledge. The inviolability did not depend on the legate’s subjective conviction that he had the immunity. As a result, the status of a captive envoy did not change. Accordingly, the delegating community was unable to resign from the priviledge. Therefore the envoy’s inviolability - the public law immunity seems to be absolute in the Roman principate.
- Źródło:
-
Prawo Kanoniczne; 1994, 37, 3-4; 165-174
2353-8104 - Pojawia się w:
- Prawo Kanoniczne
- Dostawca treści:
- Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł