Reynaldo D. Ponteras Jr.

ABPO4
Consular and Diplomatic Practices
1. A. President addressed as Your Excellency.
Excellency is an honorific style given to certain members of an organization or state.
Usually, people addressed as excellency are heads of state, heads of government, governors,
ambassadors, certain ecclesiastics, royalty, aristocracy, and military, and others holding
equivalent rank. It is sometimes misinterpreted as a title of office in itself, but in fact is an
honorific that precedes various titles both in speech and in writing. In reference to such an
official, it takes the form His or Her Excellency. In most republican nations, the president is
formally addressed as His Excellency; however in day-to-day conversation Mr. President
remains the most common means of address.
A style of office, or honorific, is a legal, official, or recognized title. A style, by tradition
or law, precedes a reference to a person who holds a post or political office, and is sometimes
used to refer to the office itself. An honorific can also be awarded to an individual in a personal
capacity.
In the United States, the form Excellency was commonly used for George Washington
during his Presidency, but it began to fall out of use with his successor, and today has been
replaced in direct address with the simple Mr. President or The Honorable. However, in many
foreign countries and in United Nations protocol the President of the United States is usually
referred to as His Excellency. Diplomatic correspondence to President Abraham Lincoln during
the American Civil War, as during the Trent Affair, for instance, frequently referred to him as His
Excellency.
The President of the United States is directly addressed as Mr. President and introduced
as The President of the United States. In the Philippines, the official title of the president is
"President of the Philippines" or "Ang Mahal na Pangulo" translated as The Beloved President.
The honorific for the President of the Philippines is "Your Excellency" or "His Excellency",
adopted from the title of the Governor-General of the Philippines during Spanish and American
occupation. The honorific of the current Philippine President is "His Excellency, Benigno Aquino
III.
In several of the former Thirteen Colonies, the form Excellency is used for the governor.
These include Georgia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia. West Virginia likewise adopted the title His/Her
Excellency from its parent state. The term is used frequently in the U.S. state of Georgia on the
state governor's letterhead, the text of executive orders, any document that requires the
governor's signature, and in formal settings. Nevertheless, Excellency is used frequently when
introducing the Governor of Pennsylvania, the Governor of Virginia, and the Governor of North
Carolina at formal events. The Governor of Michigan is traditionally afforded the courtesy title,
though it has fallen out of use in recent years. Though ambassadors are traditionally accorded the

title elsewhere, the U.S. government does not use excellency for its diplomatic corps, preferring
the honorable instead.
B. President addressed as Mr. President.
Addressing the president as Mr. President entails a sense of authority. And that includes
power. Power is one of the most essential principles to attain foreign policy success. According
to Powell,
Power is necessary because it is not possible to reason with every adversary that threatens a
vital interest. Power has a reputation as well that walks before it into the future, affecting what
others think about us. It is diplomacy that deploys power's reputation to achieve policy goals in
the form of political influence. A wise diplomacy magnifies power's attractive quality by using
power to benefit others as well as oneself."

The word president is derived from the Latin prae, "before" and sedere, "to sit." The one
who presides over or "sits before" a gathering and ensures that debate is conducted according to
the rules of order. Early examples are from the universities of Oxford and Cambridge and the
founding President of the Royal Society William Brouncker in 1660. The most common modern
usage is as the title of a head of state in a republic.
According to history, the president of a Parlement in France evolved into a powerful
magistrate, a member of the so-called noblesse de robe or the nobility of the gown, with
considerable judicial as well as administrative authority. The name referred to his primary role of
presiding over trials and other hearings. In the 17th and 18th centuries, seats in the Parlements,
including presidencies, became effectively hereditary, since the holder of the office could ensure
that it would pass to an heir by paying the crown a special tax known as the paulette. The post of
premier president, however, could only be held by the King's nominees. The Parlements were
abolished by the French Revolution. In modern France the chief judge of a court is known as its
president.
As a matter of fact, the word president was first used during the Commonwealth of
England to denote the highest official in a government. After the abolition of the monarchy the
English Council of State, whose members were elected by the House of Commons, became the
executive government of the Commonwealth. The Council of State was the successor of the
Privy Council, which had previously been headed by the Lord President; its successor the
Council of State was also headed by a Lord President, the first of which was John Bradshaw.
However, the Lord President alone was not head of state, because that office was vested in the
council as a whole. A common style of address for presidents, "Mr. President," is borrowed from
British Parliamentary tradition, in which the presiding Speaker of the House of Commons is
referred to as "Mr. Speaker." Coincidentally, this usage resembles the older French custom of
referring to the president of a parlement as "Monsieur le President", a form of address that in
modern France applies to both the President of the Republic and to chief judges. Similarly, the
Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons is addressed by francophone parliamentarians as
"Monsieur President".

The 1787 Constitution of the United States did not specify the manner of address for the
chief executive. When George Washington was sworn in as the first President of the United
States in 1789, he initially used the style, "His High Mightiness, the President of the United
States and Protector of their Liberties," a title elaborated by the Joint Congressional Committee
on titles over the course of a month. Critics charged that it smacked of monarchy. Washington
consented to the demands of James Madison and the United States House of Representatives that
the title be altered to "Mr. President." The first Vice President of the United States and the second
President, John Adams, felt the title showed too little deference and lacked prestige, but he was
unsuccessful in replacing it.
One of the first issues that the United States Senate dealt with was the title of president.
Vice President John Adams called the senators' attention to this pressing procedural matter. Most
senators were averse to calling the president anything that resembled the titles of European
monarchs, yet John Adams proceeded to recommend the title: "His Highness, the President of the
United States, and Protector of their Liberties," an attempt to imitate the titles of the British
monarch: "By the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the
Faith, Prince-Elector of Hannover, Duke of Brunswick" and the French monarch: "By the Grace
of God, Most Christian King of France and Navarre." Some senators favored "His Elective
Majesty" or "His Excellency" (the latter of which would become the standard form of address for
elected presidents of later republics). James Madison, a member of the House of Representatives,
would have none of it. He declared that the pretentious European titles were ill suited for the
"genius of the people" and "the nature of our Government." Washington became completely
embarrassed with the topic and so the senators dropped it. From then on the president would
simply be called the President of the United States or Mr. President, drawing a sharp distinction
between American and European customs.
Once the United States adopted the title of "President" for its republican Head of State,
many other nations followed suit. Almost all of American nations that became independent from
Spain in the early 1810s and 1820s chose a US-style president as their chief executive.
Philippines once ruled under the Americans also copied and used the title until today. The only
person entitled to the honorific "Excellency" is the President of the Philippines. The only way to
introduce the President of the Philippines is, "Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the
Philippines." The only way to toast the President is, "Ladies and Gentlemen, to the President of
the Philippines," as he or she needs no further introduction by virtue of his or her position.
2. Prestige and Privileges of the Head of State.
Diplomatic immunity is a principle of international law by which certain foreign
government officials are not subject to the jurisdiction of local courts and other authorities. The
concept of immunity began with ancient tribes. In order to exchange information, messengers
were allowed to travel from tribe to tribe without fear of harm. They were protected even when
they brought bad news. Today, immunity protects the channels of diplomatic communication by
exempting diplomats from local jurisdiction so that they can perform their duties with freedom,
independence, and security. Diplomatic immunity is not meant to benefit individuals personally;
it is meant to ensure that foreign officials can do their jobs. Under the concept of reciprocity,
diplomats assigned to any country in the world benefit equally from diplomatic immunity.

Diplomatic immunity is a principle of international law by which certain foreign

government officials are not subject to the jurisdiction of local courts and other authorities for
both their official and, to a large extent, their personal activities. The principle of diplomatic
immunity is one of the oldest elements of foreign relations. Ancient Greek and Roman
governments, for example, accorded special status to envoys, and the basic concept has evolved
and endured until the present. As a matter of international law, diplomatic immunity was
primarily based on custom and international practice until quite recently. In the period since
World War II, a number of international conventions have been concluded. These conventions
have formalized the customary rules and made their application more uniform. Notwithstanding
the antiquity of the concept of diplomatic immunity, its purpose is oft en misunderstood by the
citizens of this and other countries. Occasional abuses of diplomatic immunity, which are
brought to public attention, have also served to prejudice public attitudes toward this practice.
Dealing with the concept of immunity poses particular problems for law enforcement
officers who, by virtue of their oath and training, are unaccustomed to granting special privileges
or concessions to individuals who break the law. On the other hand, police officers who
understand the importance of diplomatic immunity may be inclined to be overly generous in its
application if they do not have a full understanding of its parameters. It is the purpose of this
booklet to familiarize police officers with the general rules of diplomatic and consular immunity
and to provide them with specific guidance regarding the handling of difficult situations.
A sovereign who has been deposed by his people, or who has abdicated, and whose
deposition or abdication has been recognized by other states, and a president of a republic whose
term of office has expired, or who has been overthrown by a revolution, enjoy no immunities.
Any privileges accorded to such personages during their residence in other countries must
depend on the course which the authorities of those countries deem it expedient to adopt.
Functions of a Diplomatic Mission

Represent the home country in the host country

Protect the interests of the home country and its citizens in the host country
Negotiate with the government of the host country
Monitor and report on conditions and developments in the commercial, economic,
cultural, and scientific life of the host country
Promote friendly relations between the host country and the home country
Develop commercial, economic, cultural, and scientific relations between the host
country and the home country.

It is a basic principle of international law that a sovereign state does not adjudicate on the
conduct of a foreign state. The foreign state is entitled to procedural immunity from the
processes of the forum state. This immunity extends to both criminal and civil liability. State
immunity probably grew from the historical immunity of the person of the monarch. In any
event, such personal immunity of the Head of State persists to the present day: the Head of State
is entitled to the same immunity as the state itself. The diplomatic representative of the foreign
state in the forum state is also afforded the same immunity in recognition of the dignity of the
state, which he represents. This immunity enjoyed by a Head of State in power and Ambassador

in post is a complete immunity attaching to the person of the Head of State or Ambassador and
rendering him immune from all actions or prosecutions whether or not they relate to matters
done for the benefit of that state. Such immunity is granted ratione personae.
The immunities ratione personae or personal immunities, is predicated on the notion that,
any activity of a head of state or government, or diplomatic agents2 or foreign minister must be
immune from foreign jurisdiction. This is to avoid foreign state either infringing sovereign
prerogatives of states or interfering with the official functions of a foreign state agent under the
guise of dealing with an exclusively private act. Historically, this immunity stems from the time
when heads of state were seen as personifying the state or the very embodiment of the state itself.
The grant of sovereign immunity to a state in civil proceedings pursues the legitimate aim of
complying with international law to promote comity and good relations between states through
the respect of anothers sovereignty and that in consequence measures taken which reflect
generally recognized rules of public international law on state immunity cannot in principle be
regarded as imposing a disproportionate restriction on the right of access to court as embodied in
article 6. Just as the right of access to court is an inherent part of the fair trial guarantee in that
article, so some restrictions on access must likewise be regarded as inherent, an example being
those limitations generally accepted by the community of nations as part of the doctrine of state
immunity.
The Nature of State Immunity
State immunity is a restriction on the jurisdiction of states founded on international
Comity. It would be an affront to the dignity and sovereignty of a state for that state, or for an
individual personifying that state, to be impleaded before the courts of another state. Immunity
against such suit is because of immunity rationae personae. The dignity of a state may also be
affronted if those who are or were its officials are impleaded in relation to the conduct of its
affairs before the courts of another state. In those circumstances, the state can normally extend
the cloak of its own immunity over those officials. It can be said that to implead those officials
amounts, indirectly, to impleading the state. Where immunity is accorded in these circumstances,
it is on the grounds of the subject matter of the litigation or ratione materiae.
3. The Foreign Service Officers Examinations
Applicants who wish to be a Foreign Service Officer really go through a highly
competitive written exam, oral assessment, and security investigation process. Although it
involves hardships, like the way it conducts its examinations, it gives unique rewards to those
who are going to pass the exam. Being a Foreign Service Officer is not an easy task. Actually, it
is not simply a job, but a way to serve your country and reach your professional goals. The
reason why Foreign Service Officer Examinations undergo a very difficult process is that
diplomacy, as the bridge for political relationships really matters.

They work as front-line professionals representing the state. Their consular behavior and
their political, social, and economic images reflect that of the state it represents. That is why,
being a Foreign Service Officer, you have to be a master in the area of consular and diplomatic
practices. You do not only deal your internal affairs, but you also play a very important role in
the international arena. You must be more than equipped in the areas like consular, economics,
management, political and public diplomacy, society, culture, economy, history, government,
political systems, constitution, world history and geography, world political and social issues. In
America, diplomacy is the first line of defense. Thus, hiring procedures are really strict when it
comes to screening out the applicants. They are, indeed, the cream of the crops once they are
already chosen. Hiring eligible and exact persons is one way of investing healthy diplomatic
relations among countries.
Foreign Service Officer Qualifications - 13 DIMENSIONS
What qualities do we seek in FSO candidates? The successful candidate will demonstrate the
following dimensions that reflect the skills, abilities, and personal qualities deemed essential to
the work of the Foreign Service:
Composure. To stay calm, poised, and effective in stressful or difficult situations; to think on
one's feet, adjusting quickly to changing situations; to maintain self-control.
Cultural Adaptability. To work and communicate effectively and harmoniously with persons of
other cultures, value systems, political beliefs, and economic circumstances; to recognize and
respect differences in new and different cultural environments.
Experience and Motivation. To demonstrate knowledge, skills or other attributes gained from
previous experience of relevance to the Foreign Service; to articulate appropriate motivation for
joining the Foreign Service.
Information Integration and Analysis. To absorb and retain complex information drawn from a
variety of sources; to draw reasoned conclusions from analysis and synthesis of available
information; to evaluate the importance, reliability, and usefulness of information; to remember
details of a meeting or event without the benefit of notes.
Initiative and Leadership. To recognize and assume responsibility for work that needs to be
done; to persist in the completion of a task; to influence significantly a groups activity, direction,
or opinion; to motivate others to participate in the activity one is leading.
Judgment. To discern what is appropriate, practical, and realistic in a given situation; to weigh
relative merits of competing demands.
Objectivity and Integrity. To be fair and honest; to avoid deceit, favoritism, and discrimination;
to present issues frankly and fully, without injecting subjective bias; to work without letting
personal bias prejudice actions.

 Oral Communication. To speak fluently in a concise, grammatically correct, organized, precise,

and persuasive manner; to convey nuances of meaning accurately; to use appropriate styles of
communication to fit the audience and purpose.
Planning and Organizing. To prioritize and order tasks effectively, to employ a systematic
approach to achieving objectives, to make appropriate use of limited resources.
Quantitative Analysis. To identify, compile, analyze, and draw correct conclusions from
pertinent data; to recognize patterns or trends in numerical data; to perform simple mathematical
operations.
Resourcefulness. To formulate creative alternatives or solutions to resolve problems, to show
flexibility in response to unanticipated circumstances.
Working With Others. To interact in a constructive, cooperative, and harmonious manner; to
work effectively as a team player; to establish positive relationships and gain the confidence of
others; to use humor as appropriate.
Written Communication. To write concise, well organized, grammatically correct, effective and
persuasive English in a limited amount of time.