Deng v. The United Nations

Background

The plaintiffs were Shiming Deng, who was deceased; Qianhui Deng, identified as administrator on behalf of Shiming Deng and himself; and Yunhong Ding. The opinion states that Qianhui lived in China and that Yunhong lived in Michigan. Yunhong Ding did not sign the complaint.

The complaint concerned Shiming’s 2004 conviction in Canada, the deportation proceedings that followed, and his suicide on November 22, 2005. Qianhui alleged that state authorities disregarded Shiming’s mental illness and suicide risk and failed to protect him during the deportation process. Qianhui previously pursued litigation against Canada and, with Yunhong Ding, submitted a complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The Human Rights Committee later denied registration of that complaint because of nonexhaustion of domestic remedies and abuse of the right of submission.

The plaintiffs sued the United Nations, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and Human Rights Committee members Arif Bulkan and Helene Tigroudja. They asserted claims under several federal civil-rights statutes, United States and international law, the United Nations Charter, and the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. Qianhui sought a declaration that the Human Rights Committee violated international law, a public apology, money damages, and review of the complaint submitted to the Human Rights Committee.

Court’s analysis

The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court lacked legal authority to hear the case. It explained that the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations gives the United Nations absolute immunity from suit unless the organization expressly waives that immunity. The court also cited the International Organizations Immunities Act, which provides designated international organizations with immunity from suit and judicial process comparable to the immunity enjoyed by foreign governments. The court concluded that the United Nations and the Secretary-General were absolutely immune from the claims asserted.

The court further explained that United Nations employees are protected by functional immunity for acts performed in their official capacities and within their official functions. It concluded that, even if Bulkan and Tigroudja did not have full diplomatic immunity, the claims against them arose from acts performed in their official roles and were therefore also barred by immunity.

The court noted two additional possible defects but did not resolve them because immunity was sufficient to dismiss the complaint. First, it questioned whether Qianhui and Yunhong had standing, or a sufficient legal basis to bring the claims. Second, it noted that Yunhong had not signed the complaint as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Disposition

The complaint was dismissed without prejudice, on immunity grounds, for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court denied leave to amend because it concluded that the defects could not be cured by amendment. The court stated that the defendants were not required to answer the complaint, entered judgment, and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required costs.