Receiving a speeding or traffic fine in the mail is not such a rare event for many Australians.
But if you're a diplomat or embassy official working in the country, it seems you may be lucky enough to escape it.
The Department of Foreign Affairs has sent dozens of letters to embassies in Canberra over the past three years, reprimanding them over traffic and drink driving offences.
But the diplomats have managed to escape punishment because of an international legal convention called diplomatic immunity.
But what does this legal term mean in practice and is it open to abuse?
While not revealing the names of the specific embassies or diplomats involved, the Department of Foreign Affairs has revealed the nature of the traffic infringements, under freedom of information laws.
They include speeding, driving through red lights and give-way signs, drink-driving and driving without seatbelts.
One female diplomat was allowed to keep driving in Canberra, despite accumulating 15 demerit points in 15 months.
But the Department of Foreign Affairs has only been able to send out warning letters to the offending embassies, asking them to keep the worst repeat offenders in line.
Professor Don Rothwell specialises in international law at the Australian National University in Canberra and has done extensive research on diplomatic immunity.
He says the principles of diplomatic immunity are enshrined in the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations which came into force in the 1960s and which Australia has ratified.
Professor Rothwell believes it makes sense to protect diplomats from prosecution because their independence would immediately be compromised if they faced criminal proceedings in Australia.
"I think the Australian Government is taking the only approach it really can at the moment, and that is to bring these matters to the attention of the foreign governments. That's entirely appropriate. If there was an exceptionally serious case in which a foreign diplomat for example was repeatedly stopped for drink driving and really had a pattern of such behaviour, it would always be open to the Australian government to declare that diplomat persona non grata on the basis that they did pose a possible threat to public safety and security."
However Professor Rothwell concedes he has never come across a case in Australia where a diplomat has been forced to return to their homeland because of their personal misdemeanours.
He says the power of the receiving country to declare a diplomat persona non grata tends to only happen when Australia has a political dispute with the other country.
Professor Rothwell says that happened in May 2012 when Foreign Minister Bob Carr expelled the Syrian Chargé d'affaires Jawdat Ali because of concerns over the Syrian government's actions during the civil war there.
Professor Rothwell says protection for diplomats from criminal prosecution under the Vienna Conventions is very extensive and includes serious crimes.
"So even if a diplomat commits an act of murder, they still enjoy immunity from local prosecution. Now in the case of a diplomat committing an act of murder, it may well be that their foreign government would waive immunity in that case or the foreign government might immediately remove the diplomat, albeit in a situation where they would escape criminal culpability. But the rule that exists under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is that diplomats enjoy complete immunity with respect to criminal prosecution and that is a very firm rule of international law."
Some former ambassadors argue that immunity is critical to protecting diplomats from political interference or harassment from foreign governments.
However they also emphasise that foreign governments do have the power to waive a diplomat's immunity which can then allow that diplomat to be questioned by local law enforcement officials.
Richard Broinowski was a diplomat for over thirty years and is a former Australian Ambassador to South Korea, Mexico and Vietnam.
He is currently an Adjunct Professor in media studies at Sydney University.
Professor Broinowski concedes diplomatic immunity could be abused by individual diplomats and governments.
However in his role as a former Ambassador, he says he always expected his staff to face up to the consequences if they broke laws around speeding or drink driving.
"The principle is that if you're doing something in the official course of your duty, diplomatic immunity applies. But if it's a private matter, then it doesn't. But of course the embassies would say that if someone was drink driving 'Oh, he or she was on their way back from some event where alcohol was consumed but they were on official duty.' Now of course that is used all the time when it might be just a shopping expedition or going out and getting drunk."
Another former diplomat agrees the rules around immunity are often abused, especially around minor offences like traffic and parking rules.
Helen Ware was Australia's High Commissioner in Zambia, Malawi and Namibia in the 1980s and is now Professor of Peace Studies at the University of New England in northern New South Wales.
Professor Ware believes immunity is critical to preventing diplomats from facing trumped-up, or manufactured, charges in hostile countries.
However she says diplomats are often guilty of traffic offences around the world and that problem extends to the United Nations headquarters.
"New York, for example, gets exceedingly annoyed with the number of UN diplomats who commit parking offences, but they can't actually do anything about it. What they tend to do is publish a list of the countries which have the most parking fines that they haven't paid or acknowledged as a means of trying to shame them. So now in some of the European countries, they are now saying, 'Well the diplomat has immunity, but his or her car does not'."
Professor Ware believes most diplomats are conscious of the need to abide by the laws of the country they are working in.
She says they risk embarrassing not only themselves but the country they represent, if they break those laws.
"[It's] What you might call their shameability. Obviously if you have a diplomat misbehaving, his or her government certainly is not going to want to have the reputation of having a drunken idiot as their diplomat!"
