22 U.S.C. § 288a

Privileges, exemptions, and immunities of international organizations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar

International organizations shall enjoy the status, immunities, exemptions, and privileges set forth in this section, as follows:(a) International organizations shall, to the extent consistent with the instrument creating them, possess the capacity—(i) to contract;(ii) to acquire and dispose of real and personal property;(iii) to institute legal proceedings.(b) International organizations, their property and their assets, wherever located, and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments, except to the extent that such organizations may expressly waive their immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract.(c) Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.(d) Insofar as concerns customs duties and internal-revenue taxes imposed upon or by reason of importation, and the procedures in connection therewith; the registration of foreign agents; and the treatment of official communications, the privileges, exemptions, and immunities to which international organizations shall be entitled shall be those accorded under similar circumstances to foreign governments.(Dec. 29, 1945, ch. 652, title I, § 2, 59 Stat. 669.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 98 cases (20 in the last 5 years), 1949–2025 · leading case: Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 139 S. Ct. 759 (2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 139 S. Ct. 759 (2019). · cites it 9× “” 22 U. S. C. §288a(b). At that time, foreign govern- ments were entitled to virtually absolute immunity as a matter of in- ternational grace and comity.”

Janet E. Atkinson v. The Inter-Am. Dev. Bank, 156 F.3d 1335 (D.C. Cir. 1998). · cites it 5× “” 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). And a provision of the Inter-American Development Bank Act grants the Bank the right to remove any action brought against it from state court into federal court.”

Marvin R. Broadbent v. Org. of Am. States, 628 F.2d 27 (D.C. Cir. 1980). · cites it 4× “§ 288a provides: International organizations shall enjoy the status, immunities, exemptions, and privileges set forth in this section, as follows: (a) International organizations shall, to the extent consistent with the instrument creating them, possess the capacity— (i) to…”

John Does 1-7 v. Taliban, 101 F.4th 1 (D.C. Cir. 2024). · cites it 6× “22 U.S.C. § 288a(b); see Exec. Order No. 9751, 11 Fed.”

Budha Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 860 F.3d 703 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “” 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). The President determines whether an organization is entitled to such immunity.”

United States v. Ng Lap Seng, 934 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “1418, and the International Organization Immunities Act, 22 U.S.C. § 288a).19 19 Moreover, within that framework, certain limitations and exceptions apply.”

Polak v. Int'l Monetary Fund, 657 F. Supp. 2d 116 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 7× “at 3 (quoting 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b)). Because President Truman designated the defendant as an international organization entitled to the privileges and immunities conferred by the IOIA, the defendant argues that it is absolutely immune from suit based on the IOIA.”

Margot Rendall-Speranza v. Edward A. Nassim, 107 F.3d 913 (D.C. Cir. 1997). · cites it 2× “” 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). In 1945, when the IOIA was first passed, foreign governments enjoyed absolute immunity.”

Garcia v. Sebelius, 867 F. Supp. 2d 125 (D.D.C. 2012). · cites it 4× “Roses moves to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, asserting immunity under the International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 (“IOIA”), 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b) (2006). Roses’s Mem. at 1.”

Osseiran v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 498 F. Supp. 2d 139 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 2× “As an international organization entitled to protection under the International Organizations Immunities Act (“IOIA”), 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b), IFC maintains that it is immune from Osseiran’s action.”

Mendaro v. World Bank, 717 F.2d 610 (D.C. Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “22 U.S.C. § 288a(b) (1976). . Id § 288. .”

Garcia v. Sebelius, 919 F. Supp. 2d 43 (D.D.C. 2013). · cites it 3× “The Court then addressed Roses’s argument that she was entitled to immunity under the *46 International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 (“IOIA”), 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b) (2006). Id. Agreeing with Roses’s position, the Court held that the IOIA provided “absolute immunity” to…”

Show all 98 citing cases →

— 22 U.S.C. § 288a(a) — 3 cases

Balfour, Guthrie & Co. v. United States, 90 F. Supp. 831 (N.D. Cal. 1950).

Pan Am. Health Org. v. Montgomery Cnty., 889 F. Supp. 234 (D. Maryland 1994).

Designation of Interpol as a Pub. Int'l Org. Under the Int'l Organizations Immunities Act (OLC 1983).

— 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b) — 76 cases

Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 139 S. Ct. 759 (2019). “” 22 U. S. C. §288a(b). At that time, foreign govern- ments were entitled to virtually absolute immunity as a matter of in- ternational grace and comity.”

Janet E. Atkinson v. The Inter-Am. Dev. Bank, 156 F.3d 1335 (D.C. Cir. 1998). “” 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). And a provision of the Inter-American Development Bank Act grants the Bank the right to remove any action brought against it from state court into federal court.”

John Does 1-7 v. Taliban, 101 F.4th 1 (D.C. Cir. 2024). “22 U.S.C. § 288a(b); see Exec. Order No. 9751, 11 Fed.”

Budha Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 860 F.3d 703 (D.C. Cir. 2017). “” 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). The President determines whether an organization is entitled to such immunity.”

Polak v. Int'l Monetary Fund, 657 F. Supp. 2d 116 (D.D.C. 2009). “at 3 (quoting 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b)). Because President Truman designated the defendant as an international organization entitled to the privileges and immunities conferred by the IOIA, the defendant argues that it is absolutely immune from suit based on the IOIA.”

— 22 U.S.C. § 288a(c) — 5 cases

Enterasys Networks, Inc. v. Mexmal Mayorista, S.A. de C.V. (In re Dinastia, L.P.), 381 B.R. 512 (S.D. Tex. 2007).

Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp. (2019).

Matos Rodriguez v. Pan Am. Health Org. (D.D.C. 2020).

Designation of Interpol as a Pub. Int'l Org. Under the Int'l Organizations Immunities Act (OLC 1983).

— 22 U.S.C. § 288a(d) — 2 cases

Panm Sat Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States of Am., Bellsouth Wireless, Inc., Intervenor, 198 F.3d 890 (D.C. Cir. 1999).

Designation of Interpol as a Pub. Int'l Org. Under the Int'l Organizations Immunities Act (OLC 1983).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.