(see above), drawing the conclusion that “no reciprocal breach of diplomatic immunity is permissible” (para 125). The ILC’s use of the
term “reciprocal” means that it is talking not only about coun
termeasures against abuses of diplomatic immunity, but also about violations of immunity as coun
termeasures. It did not, however, cite the relevant obiter. 4. Conclusion Regarding diplomatic immunity and coun
termeasures, the Tehran judgment seems to make two interesting and important points: Firstly, coun
termeasures cannot be used against abuses of diplomatic immunity, and secondly, coun
termeasures cannot violate diplomatic immunity. These two...