Diplomatic immunity is afforded to foreign diplomats and protect them from “lawsuit or prosecution under the host country’s laws” (Wikipedia).

Criminals, on the other hand, do not have diplomatic immunity but, nevertheless, their home country prefers to be deal with the accused in their own land rather than let the country where the crime was committed decide and carry out punishment. This includes murder. The New York Times recently published an article of such a case in Houston, Texas.

New York Times Article: Texas Executes Mexican Despite Objections

Regarding international law, the greatest conflict of interest with crime and punishment is that of state sovereignty- “the exclusive right to have control over an area of governance, people, or oneself” (Wikipedia). As you can see in this definition, it includes people. In this same definition, is “area of governance”. The two sometimes, and in this case, conflict.

Is it foolish to think, “eye for an eye”, or is there a larger debate to be had?

In a world where independent nation states are the norm and international cooperation is sought, the question of sovereignty can get messy.