Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ―Paris Science and Education Forum‖ (March 2-4, 2026) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – Paris, France, 2026. - 293 p.

88 The balance between preventive security and respect for host State jurisdiction becomes especially delicate in these contexts. Therefore, risk-oriented planning and pre-established communication channels with local authorities are essential. 5. Extraterritoriality and Jurisdictional Balance. Diplomatic premises enjoy inviolability but do not constitute territory of the sending State in a strict sovereignty sense. They remain situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the host State, albeit subject to special protections. This legal nuance has practical implications for the activity of duty commandants. Their authority derives from Ukrainian law; however, its exercise must not contradict the public order regulations of the receiving State. For example, measures related to restricting entry, responding to attempted intrusion, or transferring individuals to local police must align with both international diplomatic norms and domestic legal expectations. Misinterpretation of this dual framework may lead to jurisdictional conflicts or diplomatic disputes. 6. Documentation as a Legal Safeguard. Across all legal systems analyzed, documentation of incidents emerges as a universal safeguard. Accurate recording of events, preservation of evidence, and structured communication with law enforcement authorities serve not only operational efficiency but also legal accountability. The comparative perspective demonstrates that while operational tactics may vary, procedural reliability and evidentiary clarity remain constant requirements. Thus, standardized internal reporting protocols adapted to local legal standards represent a necessary component of effective diplomatic security. Conclusions. 1. Although the protection of diplomatic missions is based on a uniform international legal obligation, its practical implementation is significantly influenced by host State legal systems and policing models. 2. The duty commandant functions as a legal and operational intermediary between international diplomatic norms and domestic public order frameworks.