在传统国际法理论中，国家官员享有免于外国法院刑事管辖的豁免权。但当案件涉及到对国际罪行的触犯时，情形则有所不同。对官员国际罪行的审判存在于各类国际法庭和国内法院的判例中，法院基于不同的法律依据对涉及国际罪行的官员排除豁免权的适用。 然而官员豁免权在国际罪行中的适用与排除在国际法上是一个复杂且有争议的问题。一方面，习惯国际法对国际罪行下官员豁免的具体规则尚不明确，另一方面，国际刑事法院依据《罗马规约》中的“官方身份无关性”规则，意图排除被告的豁免权，但在实践中遇到了巨大阻碍。进一步厘清国际罪行中的官员豁免规则成为了国际刑事司法的现实需求。 有基于此，本文试图从习惯法和国际刑事法院两个层面分别探究官员刑事豁免的适用规定。本文首先从国际法委员会近年来的研究报告切入，对属人豁免和属事豁免在习惯法上的适用规则分别讨论，以此说明习惯国际法在国际罪行的官员豁免排除问题上存在不确定性。进而从国际刑事法院审理的“巴希尔案”着手，着重研究安理会决议将案件递交给法院时，非《罗马规约》缔约国官员的豁免权适用，并通过对习惯法内涵的解释和对安理会决议效力的分析，提出在此情形下应当在国际刑事法院排除官员豁免权的法律解释。在此基础上，本文进一步反思了豁免权争议给国际刑事司法带来的阻碍，并从制度结构和外部关系的角度提出造成现有僵局的原因。

State officials enjoy the immunities exempted from foreign criminal jurisdiction in traditional theories of international law. But things are different when it comes to cases concerning commitments of international crimes. Trials against Official’s international crimes exist in the precedents of various international tribunals and municipal courts, and courts would rely on different legal bases to preclude the application of immunities of officials concerning international crimes. However the application and preclusion of immunity in international crimes is a complicated and controversial issue in international law. Specific rules of customary international law on this topic, on one hand, have not been ascertained yet. On the other hand, International Criminal Court attempted to preclude respondent’s immunity via “irrelevance of official capacity” rule in Rome Statute, but confronted huge obstacles in practice. To further clarify the immunity rules of international crimes has become a realistic demand for international criminal justice. For this reason, this article tries to research the application rules of criminal immunity from two folds: customary law and International Criminal Court. The article first starts from reports of International Law Commission in recent years to illustrate the uncertainty of customary international law on the preclusion of immunity involving international crimes. The article then touches upon the “Bashir case” before ICC to focus on the application of immunity in the situation referred to the Court by UN Security Council, and, by analyzing the legal effect of customary law and Security Council Resolution, provides with legal reasons why immunities should be precluded in such cases. The article further reviews the obstacles of international criminal justice brought by immunity dispute, and interprets the current deadlock from the framework inside and the relations outside.