In light of the International Law Commission's proposal (Trial of Heads of State after the end of their official duties)

Abstract A historical review of the global community's modern approach reveals the progress of international criminal justice in international crimes against the legal system governing the rules of immunity of state officials. An approach that has been reflected in the work of international courts, especially the International Criminal Court. The International Law Commission, in its draft “Immunity of State Officials from Acts of Foreign Jurisdiction” (2003), considered the immunity of Heads of State, Heads of Government, and Ministers of Foreign Affairs to constitute personal immunity from acts of foreign criminal jurisdiction, by establishing a balance between justice and peace. On the other hand, Bayan Dasht (2017) stated that material immunity does not apply to crimes such as “genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture, and enforced disappearance.” The present study aims to examine, using a descriptive and analytical method and using library studies, the trial of the President of the country for committing international crimes, taking into account developments in international law. This study, by analyzing the sources of international law and distinguishing between personal and material immunity, concludes that the head of state is subject to punishment in cases of committing international crimes, after the end of the term. However, the prosecution and surrender of the head of state to the competent authority in cases of committing crimes of the International Law Commission. Internationalization requires the cooperation of the state of the official and other countries.