Diplomatic Representation as a Legal Mechanism for Regulating International Relations between States

https://doi-001.org/1025/17666553425409

Dr. Samia Seddiki

Affiliation:Faculty of Law and Political Science

University of Mohammed El Bachir El Ibrahimi Bordj Bou Arreridj, Algeria

samia.seddiki@univ-bba.dz

Submission: 12.04.2025. Acceptance:19.11. 2025.Publicaion:20.12.2025

Abstract
States cannot live in isolation from one another, especially in light of developments occurring across various international fields. In order to develop international relations on the one hand and protect states’ interests on the other, it has become necessary to establish a solid and organized framework governing all related matters, through what is known as diplomatic representation. Diplomatic representation is considered a fundamental means in shaping states’ foreign policy, and it also constitutes the primary gateway through which a policy of peace is achieved, as well as the protection and care of the interests of states and individuals. Moreover, it plays a major role in the settlement of international disputes and in fostering an atmosphere of friendly relations among different states. Through it, each state is able to support its international standing and strengthen its influence vis-à-vis other states.

Keywords: diplomacy, joint representation, diplomatic mission, multiple representation.

Introduction
The establishment of diplomatic relations is considered a right of the state that derives from its full sovereignty. From a practical perspective, a state cannot exercise this right merely upon completing its constituent elements; rather, it must be recognized by states willing to establish relations with it, since recognition is an acknowledgment of an existing factual situation and a consolidation of the principle of state continuity. Diplomatic representation is considered one of the fundamental pillars upon which the organization of contemporary international relations is based, as it constitutes the official framework through which states conduct their political and legal communication and manage their external interests in times of peace and crisis alike. Since the emergence of the modern state, the existence of diplomatic missions has been associated with the necessity of establishing stable channels for dialogue and negotiation, ensuring the avoidance of clashes, enhancing international cooperation, and contributing to the achievement of security and stability within the international community. International law has conferred upon this representation an organized legal character, subjecting it to international rules and customs aimed at regulating its practice and protecting it from abuse or exploitation. Hence, the following main issue is raised:

What are the manifestations of diplomatic representation as a method for developing relations between states?

To answer this issue, the first section addresses the mechanisms of diplomatic representation in international relations, while the second section examines the role of diplomatic representation in enhancing international cooperation between states.

Chapter One: Mechanisms of Diplomatic Representation in International Relations

Diplomacy is a method by which the state chooses the most appropriate means of communication to achieve its external objectives. It relies on dialogue and mutual understanding with others in order to realize the common interest of states. The emergence of the phenomenon of interdependence, which has spread with the growing sense of shared destiny and the intertwining of states’ interests and concerns, has clearly demonstrated that no state—regardless of the power and capabilities it possesses—can achieve self-sufficiency or confront the challenges imposed by the global environment on its own without cooperation with other states. Nor is any state capable of meeting its moral and even security needs due to the interconnection of economic, social, and cultural interests with other political entities forming the international community. This has occurred at the expense of absolute sovereignty and national interest. Accordingly, the first requirement addresses the diplomatic mission as a complete form of diplomatic representation, while the second requirement deals with manifestations of incomplete representation in international relations.

Section One: The Diplomatic Mission as a Complete Form of Diplomatic Representation

It cannot be denied that diplomatic representation, in both its negative and positive forms, is a right of states as subjects of international law, as they enjoy full freedom to establish diplomatic relations with whichever states they wish, given that diplomatic representation is one of the manifestations of sovereignty. As for states with limited sovereignty, such as protected states and states under trusteeship, they generally do not possess the capacity to send diplomatic envoys of their own; their representation abroad is undertaken by the protecting state or the administering state, unless the relationship between them does not permit this. However, the failure of a state with limited sovereignty to exercise the right of dispatching envoys does not prevent it from exercising passive representation, which consists in receiving envoys from other states.

In federal states, the situation varies according to the type of union. In real unions and confederations, diplomatic representation for all is exercised by the central authority of the union, unless it is agreed that one or some of these states may themselves exercise diplomatic representation. In personal unions and treaty-based unions, each of these states has the right to exercise diplomatic representation on its own behalf independently of the other, unless otherwise agreed.

The state has the freedom to determine the number of persons composing the diplomatic mission according to the importance of its interests in other states. The diplomatic mission is composed of a group of persons of varying ranks and titles; accordingly, the official authorities in the state responsible for appointing these members differ. Some members are appointed by a single authority, while others are appointed by joint decisions, and different procedures are followed depending on the conditions set by each state’s domestic law and the constraints imposed by the nature of international relations and international law.

The appointment of members of the diplomatic mission is subject to the rules of domestic law of each state. In most cases, the head of mission—of the rank of ambassador or minister plenipotentiary—is appointed by a presidential decree signed by the head of state, while the remaining members of the mission are appointed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs by an individual decision or in cooperation with another minister if the official is affiliated with the latter.
It is also required that the receiving state approve the person of the head of mission. As for the members of the diplomatic mission, Article 5 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 stipulates that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the receiving state, or any other ministry agreed upon, must be notified of the appointment of mission members, their arrival, their final departure, or the termination of their functions within the mission.

States rely in their permanent diplomatic exchange on two principal manifestations of diplomatic representation, namely:

First – The Embassy: It is defined as the highest and most elevated form of diplomatic missions, headed by a person holding the rank of ambassador accredited by the head of one state to another state. The place where the embassy carries out its work is called the premises, where the diplomatic mission performs its tasks, manages the interests of its state, and serves its nationals. The embassy premises are considered part of the territory of the state, and the authorities of the state in which the embassy is located may not enter or raid its premises except with the consent of the head of the diplomatic mission.

Second – The Legation: It is a second-rank diplomatic mission, usually headed by a minister or minister plenipotentiary accredited by the head of one state to another, but of a lower rank than an ambassador only in terms of precedence, despite enjoying all the powers of an ambassador. A legation may also be headed by a chargé d’affaires. There is also a special form of missions established between states, namely the High Commission, which refers to diplomatic missions established between states linked by a bond of political allegiance.

It is well established that a diplomatic mission must necessarily include a number of persons working under the authority of the head of mission in order to carry out the tasks and functions of the diplomatic mission. It is therefore natural that the determination of the size of the mission, in terms of the number of its members, be left to the sending state in light of the interests existing between the two states. The receiving state may also request the sending state to reduce the size of its diplomatic mission to reasonable limits.

The diplomatic mission of permanent missions comes to an end upon the completion of its work or the performance of the functions entrusted to it. Apart from permanent diplomatic missions, there are many reasons that lead to the termination of diplomatic exchange between states. These reasons vary according to the circumstances leading to the end of the diplomatic mission and may be due to the severance of diplomatic relations, the termination of the diplomatic mission itself, or the end of the mission of the diplomatic envoy.

Section Two: Manifestations of Incomplete Representation in International Relations
Agreement on the level of diplomatic representation reflects the nature of relations between states. If representation is at the level of an embassy, this indicates that relations between the accrediting state and the receiving state are characterized by understanding and cohesion. If representation is at the level of a legation, this indicates that relations between states are marked by a degree of tension and lack of harmony. However, if a change in levels occurs—whether by both states jointly or by one of them—this necessitates the conclusion of a new agreement between the two states on the basis of the existence of a new mission to be established at a new level.

For diplomatic relations between two states to be at the desired level, it is necessary to exchange diplomatic missions in order to achieve optimal coordination of their various interests, given that the diplomatic mission is considered one of the best forms upon which diplomatic relations are based. This was indicated by the International Law Commission in its commentary on Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, which stated that the most complete form of establishing diplomatic relations between states is through a permanent diplomatic mission on the territory of another state. However, there is nothing to prevent states from agreeing on other methods of diplomatic relations. States are free to choose other forms of diplomatic representation that serve their interests, known as incomplete or non-full diplomatic representation, as it does not take the form of a permanent mission. Its forms include the following:

First – Multiple Representation: This is the representation whereby the sending state entrusts the head or a member of one of its diplomatic missions accredited to a foreign state with representing it to another foreign state or several states. This representation is called non-resident representation due to the absence of a head or member of a diplomatic mission permanently assigned to this task in the second foreign state.

Second – Joint Representation: This is a type of incomplete representation whereby the state entrusts the same head of a single diplomatic mission to represent it to another state, provided that the latter does not object. It is not required in this type of representation that the accrediting states have a single joint mission; each may have its own permanent mission, all of which are placed collectively under the management and supervision of a representative for all of them. Thus, there exists a single joint body representing several states to the receiving state, headed by one head of mission and comprising several nationalities at the level of individuals or at the level of the head of mission, who holds the nationality of his state and represents all states. In this case, the flags of the states are raised on one building, namely the building of the mission of the head of mission of the accrediting state.

This type of representation raises certain difficulties, as it requires complete alignment among the states resorting to it. It is rare to find states bound by shared ties and interests, even within the European Union, which committed itself under the Maastricht Treaty to coordinating foreign policy among member states. Moreover, diplomatic representation is considered one of the sovereign acts of the state, which it cannot accept to share with another state unless there is understanding in viewpoints and similarity in interests.

It should be noted here that agreement on the level of diplomatic representation reflects the nature of relations between states. Representation at the level of an embassy indicates understanding and cohesion between the accrediting state and the receiving state, whereas representation at the level of a legation indicates a degree of tension and lack of harmony. Any change in levels by one or both states requires the conclusion of a new agreement on the basis of establishing a new mission at a new level.

The diplomatic mission is the means of human communication between the sending state and the receiving state. Through the mission, states establish diplomatic relations and exchange opinions and viewpoints regarding issues of concern to both countries or relating to international relations and situations in general.

In order for the mission to perform its functions in the best possible manner, states organize their diplomatic missions in a way that corresponds to their interests and their material and technical capabilities. The missions of major states differ from those of smaller states, and the organization and size of each diplomatic mission correspond to the scope and level of its relations on all fronts. Major states possess a broad and complex diplomatic corps with agencies and personnel far exceeding those of smaller states. Accordingly, the organization of each state’s mission is linked to its will, freedom, authority, and the manner in which it secures its interests with other states.

A distinction can be made between diplomatic representation in the form of a diplomatic mission and incomplete diplomatic representation in terms of degree, functions, and the legal effects arising from each. Representation in the form of a diplomatic mission constitutes the complete and customary form of representation between states, where permanent missions headed by an ambassador or an accredited head of mission are exchanged. Such missions carry out all diplomatic functions stipulated in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, foremost among them representing the accrediting state, protecting its interests and those of its nationals, negotiating with the authorities of the receiving state, and continuously following political, economic, and cultural relations. This type of representation entails full mutual recognition and the enjoyment by mission members of broad diplomatic privileges and immunities, ensuring the independence of the mission and the effectiveness of its performance.

Incomplete diplomatic representation, by contrast, arises when relations between two states do not reach the level of full exchange of diplomatic missions, whether for political or circumstantial reasons or for financial and organizational considerations. The scope of such representation is limited to performing certain basic diplomatic functions only, and the privileges and immunities granted are narrower compared to full representation. In most cases, incomplete representation reflects a degree of reservation or coolness in diplomatic relations without necessarily reaching the level of rupture, making it an intermediate formula that allows a minimum level of diplomatic communication between states.

Section Two: The Role of Diplomatic Representation in Enhancing International Cooperation between States

Agreement on the establishment of diplomatic relations between states aims at bringing peoples closer together. Usually, such an agreement is concluded either through the visit of a high-level delegation to one of the two states party to the agreement, or through the ambassadors of the two states in a third country with which both maintain diplomatic relations. There is no legal obligation requiring states to accept diplomatic envoys; the matter is more related to the quality of relations than to law from the perspective of the international community. Accordingly, the first requirement addresses the role of the diplomatic mission in negotiation, while the second requirement examines the role of the diplomatic mission in protecting the interests of its state.

Section One: The Role of the Diplomatic Mission in Negotiation

The head of the diplomatic mission, or his representative, undertakes negotiations on behalf of the accrediting State in all matters of political, economic, and administrative concern to the State, and works to bring viewpoints closer on shared issues with the official bodies of the receiving State, or with regard to international issues of interest to both parties. The diplomatic mission operating in the receiving State has the right to negotiate with the local authorities therein, as it constitutes the ear, eye, and tongue of its State. It may examine and discuss, in the name of its State, all issues and problems and seek solutions thereto in a manner that serves the mutual interests of the two States, on the basis that the function of negotiation is an art aimed at achieving the greatest possible gains with the least possible losses. Accordingly, negotiation is among the most important diplomatic functions exercised by the diplomatic mission in the receiving State, with the aim of reconciling the conflicting interests of the two States. The performance of this task by the head of mission does not require the acquisition of letters of authorization from his State, as his authority is designated and defined in his letters of credence and in the instructions given to him.

The impact of diplomatic negotiation is reflected in the conclusion of international agreements and treaties that constitute the legal framework governing bilateral and multilateral relations. Many political, commercial, cultural, and security agreements are the result of lengthy negotiations led by diplomatic missions, relying on the rules of international law and the principles of good faith and equality among States. Thus, negotiation contributes to imparting an institutional character to international relations and transforming them from mere contingent interactions into stable relations based on clear legal obligations.

The effect of negotiation conducted by the diplomatic mission is not limited to the settlement of disputes and the conclusion of agreements; rather, it extends to protecting the interests of the State and its nationals abroad. In particular, through negotiation with the authorities of the receiving State, the diplomatic mission works to address issues that citizens or institutions affiliated with its State may face, and seeks to ensure respect for their rights in accordance with international agreements and the applicable national laws, thereby enhancing the image and prestige of the State at the international level.

In light of contemporary international transformations, the influence of diplomatic negotiation assumes particular importance amid the escalation of international crises and the increasing complexity of cross-border issues such as security, the environment, migration, and the global economy. The success of the diplomatic mission in performing its negotiating role efficiently contributes to enhancing international stability, entrenching the principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes, and making diplomatic negotiation a vital and indispensable tool for ensuring balanced diplomatic relations based on cooperation and mutual respect.

Section Two: The Role of the Diplomatic Mission in Protecting the Interests of Its State

The diplomatic envoy protects the interests of the accrediting State and the interests of its nationals in the receiving State, within the limits established by international law. The envoy also provides all assistance to the nationals of his State, protects them, and claims compensation for damages incurred by them, after exhausting all legal avenues to redress the harm suffered in accordance with the laws of the receiving State.

The diplomatic mission also protects national institutions located in the host State, follows up on the host State’s fulfillment of its obligations toward them and its compliance with the commitments concluded with the sending State, and demands that the host State protect these institutions from any unlawful attack or intrusion. In addition, the mission protects ships and aircraft belonging to its State and facilitates their berthing, landing, and takeoff without obstacles, within the limits of the laws and regulations in force in the host State, in addition to following up on investigations conducted by that State concerning incidents that occurred to ships and aircraft of the sending State.

The diplomatic mission also plays a fundamental role in protecting the economic and commercial interests of its State by encouraging trade and investment exchange, facilitating relations between economic actors in both States, and intervening with the competent authorities to address disputes or obstacles that companies or investors affiliated with the accrediting State may encounter. This role contributes to strengthening economic cooperation, supporting development, and consolidating strategic partnerships between States.

On the other hand, the diplomatic mission protects its State’s nationals present in the territory of the receiving State by providing assistance to them, defending their interests, and ensuring that they enjoy the rights recognized by the law of the receiving State. The permanent diplomatic mission usually opens specialized offices within the territory of the host State at main gathering points for nationals of the sending State. The task of these offices is to receive these citizens upon arrival, provide them with accommodation, and ensure the care of their social or professional rights.

The role of the diplomatic mission in protecting the interests of its State constitutes a cornerstone of contemporary diplomatic work, given its direct impact on enhancing the State’s standing on the international stage and safeguarding its political, economic, and humanitarian interests. The effectiveness of this role remains contingent upon the mission’s competence and its respect for the rules of international law, in a manner that achieves a balance between protecting national interests and consolidating international relations based on cooperation and mutual respect.

Conclusion

Diplomatic representation is considered one of the highest forms of international relations, as it is established only by agreement based on mutual consent between States wishing to establish such relations. On this basis, States are free to choose the form of their diplomatic relations. The objective of establishing international relations between States is to strengthen the bonds of friendship and amity that unite them, to consolidate cooperation in various fields in order to achieve shared interests. Accordingly, a set of results and proposals has been reached.

First: Results

• The importance of the existence of diplomatic representation between States lies in the diplomatic mission’s performance of the responsibilities entrusted to it in representing and protecting the interests of the accrediting State and the interests of its nationals in the receiving State, strengthening ties between the two States in various political, economic, cultural, and scientific fields, and negotiating on behalf of the government to reach an agreement that satisfies both States.
• The increase in mutual dependence and shared interests among States has doubled their need to find solutions for one another. Diplomacy has been found to be the effective means for international cooperation and for resolving disputes arising from conflicting interests among States.
• The diplomatic mission plays a pivotal role in protecting the interests of its State abroad as the official instrument representing the accrediting State in the receiving State and reflecting its political, economic, and legal orientations. This role is among the most prominent functions enshrined by international diplomatic law, particularly the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, which entrusted the mission with the task of safeguarding the supreme interests of the State and defending them by lawful means, within the framework of respect for the sovereignty and laws of the receiving State.

Second: Proposals

• Strengthening mechanisms of cooperation and coordination between States in the field of diplomatic work through the exchange of expertise and best practices, and activating diplomatic dialogue as a fundamental means of settling disputes related to diplomatic representation, instead of resorting to escalation or diplomatic rupture.
• Calling for the modernization of national legislation related to diplomatic work in a manner consistent with current international developments and responsive to the changes produced by international reality, particularly with regard to regulating diplomatic privileges and immunities and defining their functional limits to prevent their misuse.
• Emphasizing the importance of qualifying and training diplomatic cadres with specialized legal and political training, with a focus on negotiation skills, crisis management, and understanding the cultural particularities of receiving States, given the direct impact of this on improving the performance of diplomatic missions and effectively protecting State interests.
• Working to rationalize the use of diplomatic privileges and immunities and linking them to the functional purpose for which they were granted, in a manner that ensures respect for the national laws of the receiving State while preserving, at the same time, the independence and freedom of the diplomatic mission in performing its tasks.

References

First: References in Arabic

1. Books:
2. Ibrahim Ahmed Khalifa, Diplomatic and Consular Law, New University House, Alexandria, 2007.
3. Salah al-Din Amer, Introduction to the Study of Public International Law, Dar al-Nahda al-Arabia, Cairo, 2007.
4. Samir Farnan Bali, Diplomatic Immunity, Al-Halabi Legal Publications, no year of publication stated.
5. Samouhi Fawq al-Adah, Dictionary of Diplomacy and International Affairs, Library of Lebanon, Lebanon, 1974.
6. Articles:
7. Abdullah Al-Ashaal, “The Legal and Political Value of the Joint Statement,” Egyptian Journal of International Law, Issue 44, 1988.
8. Fadel Zaki Mohammed, “Law of Diplomatic Relations,” Diplomat Magazine, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Issue 12, December 1989.

Second: References in Foreign Languages

1. Books:
2. Alain Planaey, Principes de diplomatie, PEDONE, Paris, 2000.
3. Guy Agneil, Droit des relations internationales, Éditions H. Chatté, 1st edition, 1975.
4. Jean Salmon, Manuel de droit diplomatique, Éditions Bruylant, Brussels, 1994.
5. Michel Lascombe, Le droit international public, Éditions Dalloz, Paris, 1996.