The selection of a new pope is at the center of “Conclave,” the latest drama from the director Edward Berger (“All Quiet on the Western Front”). But while the setting is reverent, the movie finds its narrative propulsion in what its characters try to hide or, in this scene, what they surprisingly decide to express. Ralph Fiennes plays Cardinal Lawrence, the dean of the College of Cardinals, the group that will elect a new pope. The character has operated on the sidelines for much of his time in the church, but something bolder happens here. He addresses the cardinals in a homily that starts formally and ends with personal expressions of doubt. Narrating the scene, Berger said that it sets up Lawrence “as a character to be reckoned with. He delivers this speech that comes from his heart, and other cardinals, especially the ones with ambition to become the next pope, suddenly fear that there’s a new contender in the room.” While the cinematic narrative, directed by Edward Berger and reportedly starring Ralph Fiennes, focuses primarily on the political maneuverings and human dramas within the Sistine Chapel, the story’s ecclesiastical setting naturally raises questions about the intersection of religious authority, statehood, and the complexities of immunity law under international legal frameworks.
Vatican City and the Holy See enjoy a distinctive position in international law. The Holy See, as the supreme governing institution of the Catholic Church, wields a form of international personality distinct from that of Vatican City State. This recognition enables it to participate in international relations, maintain diplomatic missions, and enjoy privileges and immunities typically accorded to sovereign states (Shaw, International Law, 9th ed., Cambridge University Press, 2021, pp. 197–198). The Papal Nuncio, for example, is granted the same protections as foreign diplomats under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, which affords personal inviolability, immunity from local jurisdiction, and protection of mission premises (Denza, Diplomatic Law, 4th ed., Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 1–20).
What sets the Vatican apart, legally speaking, is its dual nature: it is both the spiritual center of a transnational religious community and the territorial seat of a sovereign entity recognized by the international community. The Catholic Church’s global reach is unmatched, and the Holy See’s diplomatic missions worldwide—known as Apostolic Nunciatures—mirror the embassies of secular sovereign states. They, too, enjoy broad immunities and privileges, shielded from the host state’s legal processes (Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law, 9th ed., Oxford University Press, 2019, pp. 175–178). This arrangement is not without controversy, as critics argue that broad immunities can impede legal accountability in certain cases. The tension between religious authority and state responsibility often arises in disputes involving clergy misconduct or historical claims. While Conclave does not address these issues directly, it highlights the underlying principle that the papal office—and those who operate within the Vatican’s legal umbrella—benefit from a unique brand of internationally recognized immunities (Shaw, International Law, 9th ed., pp. 196–200).
The film Conclave inevitably invites reflections on the enclosed decision-making process that shapes the global Catholic Church. Although it remains a work of fiction and political intrigue, audiences familiar with international law may be drawn to consider the ramifications of these immunities. Are such immunities merely a vestige of historical statecraft designed to protect religious authorities? Or do they serve a legitimate function in ensuring the independence and impartiality of the Holy See’s spiritual role and diplomatic engagements? In an era of heightened scrutiny over sovereignty, human rights, and the rule of law, the Vatican’s position poses a compelling conundrum. On one hand, diplomatic immunity underpins stable international relations and ensures unfettered ecclesiastical governance. On the other hand, some argue that these broad legal protections can hinder efforts to seek justice and redress, especially where the Church’s moral authority overlaps with temporal power (Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles, pp. 180–185). For scholars and practitioners of international law—and indeed, for the informed global public—the significance of immunity law extends far beyond cinematic portrayals. It lies at the core of how we understand the interplay between sovereignty, religion, and the legal norms that structure our world. The Vatican’s immunities are a testament to the complexity and nuance embedded in international legal frameworks. They illustrate how principles designed to preserve diplomatic channels and religious independence can also spark debate over transparency, justice, and accountability.
As Conclave introduces viewers to the secretive corridors of Vatican power, its narrative context underscores an important truth: the Holy See’s unique immunities are not merely historical curiosities. They are living legal constructs that continue to shape the Church’s influence in world politics. Understanding these immunities—through established scholarship and recognized legal sources—provides a richer perspective on both the film’s plot and the real-life ecclesiastical institution it dramatizes. In this sense, Conclave serves not only as entertainment but also as a catalyst for deeper inquiry into the enduring complexities of immunity law in international relations.
Commentaires