Contemporary international state immunity law: changes in legal quality

The doctrine of state immunity, arising out of international customs and regulating when one state has the right to immunity against jurisdiction of another state is treated as a part of international law binding on states. However, the national case law and legal doctrine reveal an alternative approach. Pursuant to this approach, application of state immunity is a matter of political choice by countries as opposed to an international legal obligation. Significant novelties in the contemporary international state immunity law encourage a return to the conceptual issue of its legal quality (being law). In 2004, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property that was to become the first universal state immunity treaty. In 2012, the International Court of Justice issued its first judgement on state immunity issues in the Jurisdictional Immunities case. When deciding on whether the application of immunity to foreign states is compatible with the right of access to court guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, from 2001 the European Court of Human Rights develops its case law on the matter. This dissertation aims to assess the impact of the said developments on the legal quality of international state immunity law. In particular, this dissertation analyses whether contemporary international state immunity law has acquired the characteristics attributable to the law. This research is particularly relevant for Lithuania where the matters of state immunity remain statutorily unregulated and international state immunity customs have not been clearly acknowledged as a legal source