The purpose of this study is to identify the international immunity and its type. We also sought to evaluate the immunity of international organizations from the perspective of international law in this study. International organizations have immunity in the implementation of their programs and tasks. In fact, one of the principles of public international law is immunity that prevents the presence of a foreign state in state courts. In some cases, there is a possibility of cancellation of immunity and in other cases withdrawal of immunity is derived from a political mission. These cases include accepting to solve the commercial dispute through arbitration because contrary to the authority of the state judge, judgment to address the dispute is not one of the government figures; therefore, government summoned to court of arbitration is not considered as a violation of state sovereignty. In practice, immunity has changed over the time. In other words, immunity has been modified over time. Research method used in this article is a review of the literature and interviews with experts who examine and compare the rules and regulations and the existing notes at home and abroad, about the immunity of international organizations. In the current situation, international general discipline is contrary to this subject that the government or organization holding immunity, while being aware of that, definitely accepts the condition of turning to a referee, which attracts the other party's confidence, and then refers to immunity in some stage of inspection or while implementing the sentence. The legal concept of immunity, in general, is the sense that its owner is immune from prosecution, law enforcement, and government officials and they will not be able to chase the holder of such immunity.
