The theory of absolute as in the sovereign immunity is known for providing that there is a complete enjoyment for the state from the jurisdiction of adjudication of the other states. Sovereign immunity as in the absolute theory arose from the concept that had been cherished and recognized since long. According to this concept, all of the domestic sovereigns will be waving their power of judiciary over the foreign or international sovereigns within the interest to compel intercourse amongst the other.
The theory of restrictiveness for the sovereign immunity is different from the absolute theory by the recognition of the fact that government often behaves with respect to the commercial instead of the capacity of government (Vollmer, 2001). A foreign or international government should be standing within the same position like all of the other sovereigns conducting commercial activities within the marketplace in the international context.
The restrictive theory as in the foreign sovereign is applied for suing within the courts of US that has been proved to be problematic with respect to procedure and politics. The department of state possess the power for deciding future cases with respect to immunity of foreign. Typically, the power has been reserved only for the courts (Elliot v. British Tourist Authority). The FSIA has contributed in providing this power to the courts for the determination of the immunity for foreign sovereign. This has contributed in noticing the delineation of a number of exceptions, in accordance to which there will be no attachment of the immunity.