CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 27
• Publication Date: August 3, 1965
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release'2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
89TH CONGRESS SENATE EXECUTIVE
1st Session jl No, 4
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
AUGUST 3, 1965.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. FULBRIGHT, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted
the following
REPORT
[To accompany Ex. D, 88th Cong., 2d sess.]
The Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred the
consular convention between the United States of America and the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, together with a protocol relating
t thereto, signed at Moscow on June 1, 1964 (Ex. D, 88th Cong., 2d
sess,), having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
reservation and recommends that the Senate give its advice and
consent to ratification thereof.
The purpose of the convention is to regulate the consular affairs
of each country in the territory of the other and to formalize the
understandings of the two countries with regard to the treatment
to be accorded consular officials and employees. The convention
covers such matters as the status of a consular establishment, the
duties and functions of consular officers, and the rights, privileges,
and immunities of the consular personnel of each country stationed
in the territory of the other country. The protocol, which constitutes
an integral part of the convention, amplifies certain provisions of the
convention.
Following the establishment in 1933 of diplomatic relations between
the Soviet Union and the United States, Soviet consulates were
opened in New York and San Francisco in 1934 and in'Los Angeles
in'1937. In 1941 the United States opened a consulate in Vladivostok.
The Soviet Government closed its consulates in the United States in
1948 and shortly thereafter the United States closed its consulate
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
2 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
in Vladivostok. Before these consulates were closed, the United
States had requested and received permission to open a consulate
in Leningrad but this was never done.
While there have been U.S. consulates in the Soviet Union and
Soviet consulates in the United States, there has never been a consular
convention between the two countries. The subject had been dis-
cussed intermittently since 1933 but preliminary discussions did not
begin in earnest until 1960. A series of negotiating sessions followed,
beginning in August 1963 and ending with the signing in Moscow
on June 1, 1964, of the consular convention and the protocol thereto.
The consular convention was submitted to the Senate on June 12,
1964. The Committee on Foreign Rol tions held an executive hearing
on July 12, 1965, at which time it heard Mr. Leonard C. Meeker,
State Department Legal Adviser, and Mr. Richard H. Davis, Acting
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, testify in support
of the convention. Mr.Meeker's statement appears as appendix Ito
this report.
On July 20, 1965, the committee considered the convention in
executive session and decided to take it up formally. A public hearing
was held on July 30, 1965, at which Secretary of State RuEk and Mr.
Meeker testified. Excerpts of Mr. Rusk's opening statement are
attached as appendix II to this report. The transcript of the public
hearing is being published separately. The committee considered the
convention at another executive session on August 3, 1965, at which
it decided by voice vote to order the convention reported favorably
to the Senate.
The convention follows the pattern of other bilateral consular con-
ventions to which the United States is a party except that it contains
certain distinctive provisions regarding notification and access, in the
case of citizens arrested or detained in the receiving state, and also
provides for the immunity from criminal prosecution of consular
officers and employees. Tile convention does not itself authorize the
opening of consulates or specify the number of consulates which may
be opened, but merely provides the legal framework for their opera-
tion should they be opened.
The convention contains three special provisions relating to the
protection of American citizens and consular personnel in the Soviet
Union:
1. It obliges a receiving state to notify consular officers of a sending
state of the arrest. or detention of a national of the sending state
within I to 3 days front the time of arrest or detention dcpcnJing on
conditions of communication.
2. It provides that consular officers of the sending state may visit
and communicate with it national of the sending state who is under
arrest or detained in custody by the receiving state within 2 to 4 days
of the arrest or detention depending on his location.
3. It states that consular officias and employees of the sending
state will be immune from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving
state,
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 3
The provisions for notification within 3 days and for access within
4 days with respect to Americans who may be arrested or detained in
the Soviet Union is an unprecedented commitment for the Soviet
Union to make. Hitherto, the Soviet Government has refused access
to arrested persons until after the conclusion of an investigating pro-
cedure which can extend for as long as 9 months under Soviet law.
With respect to the provision on immunity from criminal prosecu-
tion for consular personnel, there are related provisions to protect
against the abuse of such immunity by Soviet consular officers. These
provisions specify the right of the receiving state to declare consular
officers persona non grata and consular employees unacceptable.
The convention also states that all persons enjo ing immunity from
criminal jurisdiction are obliged to respect the laws and regulations
of the receiving state, including traffic regulations. Finally, the
convention provides for the screening of all nominees for consular
assignments in advance.
The convention also contains a number of safeguards against the
danger of subversion. If, after ratification of the convention, the
United States agrees to the opening of a Soviet consulate in the United
States, the officers and employees of the consulate will be subject to
the same visa screening and entry controls as officers and employees
of the Soviet Embassy in Washington. They will also be subject to
the same travel restrictions as those which apply to diplomatic
personnel. In addition, they will be subject to the expulsion provision
of the consular convention.
As a final protection against abuse of its provisions, the Convention
provides for termination by either party on six months' notice.
The Committee on Foreign Relations has carefully considered the
consular convention with the Soviet Union. The committee believes
that the convention will afford significant and necessary protection to
American travelers in the Soviet Union. The question of providing
such protection has become increasingly important in the past few
years. In 1964, about 12,000 American tourists visited the Soviet
Union. By comparison, only 204 Soviet tourists visited the United
States during the same period.
The provisions in the convention with regard to notification and
access will be binding on the Soviet Union and the United States as
soon as the convention enters into force. There will thus be an
immediate benefit to the United States in terms of the added protec-
tion that can be given to American tourists in the Soviet Union.
This should in turn eliminate some of the causes of friction and
reduce the possibility of misunderstandings which have inhibited the
development of relations between the two countries. The provisions
regarding immunity from criminal jurisdiction for consular personnel
will not enter into effect until consulates are established. Soviet
diplomatic personnel now in the United States and U.S. diplomatic
personnel now in the Soviet Union already have such immunity.
The committee considers it important that, if consulates are estab-
lished in the Soviet Union in the future, U.S. consular personnel be
afforded similar protection.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
4 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
The committee is persuaded that the convention contains adequate
measures to guard against any increased danger of subversion. In
this connection, Secretary Rusk assured the committee that the
Department of Justice has no objection to the convention. Secretary
Rusk also assured the committee that ratification of the convention
would in no way represent a change in our policy of not recognizing
the forcible incorporation of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia into
the Soviet Union
The committee's conclusion, therefore, is that the convention would
be beneficial to the United States, and it recommends that the Senate
give its advice and consent to ratification,
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
APPENDIXES
JULY 12, 1965.
STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE LEONARD C. MEEKER, THE LEGAL ADVISER,
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
ON THE U.S.-U.S.S.R. CONSULAR CONVENTION
The Department of State believes that the U.S.-U.S.S.R. Consular Convention
is clearly in the national interest of the United States and will provide important
advantages to our country. We consider that, if it is ratified, the convention
would constitute a useful contribution to our foreign policy objectives and our
fundamental goal of world peace. By establishing procedures and standards
for the conduct of the historic contacts-the movement of people, ships, and com-
merce-the convention will reduce the possibility of frictions and misunderstand-
ings and establish a useful and agreed framework wherein the interests and pro-
tection of American citizens may be advanced.
The consular convention significantly improves the ability of our Government
to assist American citizens in the U.S.S.R. The convention provides for a
number of expanded consular services. Among these, the most important is the
provision for "notification and access"; i.e., the convention specifies that the
Soviet Government will notify us within 3 days of the arrest of any American
citizen in the U.S.S.R. and that our officials will be given access to the arrested
person within 4 days of his arrest. The convention marks the first time in its
history that the U.S.S.R. has committed itself to such a provision, altering the
traditional Soviet practice of refusing access to arrested persons until after the
completion of the investigative period, which under Soviet law can be as long as
9 months. This provision thus offers an important protection to the thousands
of U.S. citizens who travel in the U.S.S.R. each year.
Members of the committee probably recall the disappearance of Professor
Barghoorn in the U.S.S.R. in 1963 when he was arrested by Soviet authorities.
We did not even know of his arrest for 12 days and our officials were never
allowed by the Soviet authorities to visit him in prison. If this convention had
been in effect then, the Soviet authorities would have been under the obligation
of notifying us of his arrest within 3 days and of granting consular access within 4.
The importance of this concession by the U.S.S.R. has already been recognized
by several other governments including specifically the British and Japanese
who are currently negotiating consular conventions with. the Soviets and hope
to achieve the same access and notification provisions.
A second important provision of the convention provides immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state for consular personnel who are na-
tionals of the sending state. This provision will afford essential protection to
American consular personnel in the Soviet Union against arbitrary police action.
On the other hand, related provisions of the convention will protect against any
abuse of such immunity by Soviet consular officers in the United States. These
provisions specify, first of all, the right of the receiving state to declare consular
personnel persona non grata. Thus by means of a persona non grata action we
would be able to remove from this country any individuals whom we did not wish
to act in a consular capacity.
The convention also states that all persons enjoying immunity from criminal
jurisdiction are under a duty to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving
state, including traffic regulations. Finally, the convention provides for practical
methods of screening all nominees for consular assignments in advance.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
6 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
,Neither this consular convention nor a subsequent agreement on consulates to
be opened in the United States and the U.S.S. It. would result in opening the door
to subversion. The convention cannot justifiably give rise to any such concern.
If, subsequent to ratification of the convention, we agreed to the opening of a
Soviet consulate in an American city, its employees would be subject to the same
visa screening and custonhs controls as officers and employees of the Soviet Em-
bassy in Washington. They would also be subject to the same travel restrictions
which now apply to Soviet officials assigned to Soviet missions in the United States.
Finally, they would be subject to the expulsion provision of the consular
convention.
Although these distinctive provisions on notification, access, and consular
immunity differ from the pattern of our previous consular conventions with other
nations, the balance of this new convention follows the standard pattern of such
conventions. Like,- the others, it is a bilateral treaty designed to regulate the
activities and functions of consular establishments and their officers and em-
ployees. It contains comparable provisions on these activities and functions.
The present convention does not itself authorize the opening of any consul-
ates in either country. It merely provides the legal framework for their opera-
tion when opened. The establishment of consulates must be agreed separately.
We have in mind suggesting the establishing of a I.& consulate general at Lenin-
grad, the second largest city of the t'.S.`.R. and the former capital of Russia.
After Moscow, this is the most important city of the U.S.S.R. We do not yet
know in what American city the Soviet Government may request establishment
of a consulate in return for an American consulate in Leningrad.
We hope that the committee, after careful study and consideration of the con-
vention, will agree that it provides important advantages to the conduct of our
consular relations with tile Soviet Union, to the protection of American citizens
and their interests in that country, and that it merits your approval. I should
like to conclude by recalling President Johnson's words on May 27, 1964, regard-
ing this convention: "It is my hope that this treaty-the first bila'.eral treaty
between the United States and the Soviet Union--will be a step forward in develop-
ing understanding between our two countries, which is so important in the
continuing struggle for peace."
JULY 30, 1065.
EXCERPTS OF STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE DEAN It-USK, SECRETARY OF STATE,
BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
The consular convention will help to normalize further our relations with the
U.S.S.R. It will help to reduce sources of friction between us. It will encourage
the Soviet Union to conduct iLielf like other responsible nations in its treatment of
foreigners and foreign interests within its territory. It will place obligations on
the Soviet authorities to respect some of the civil rights cherished by democratic
nations.
Now let me turn to the important specific provisions of the convertion and to
the benefits which it will provide for American citizens.
Apart from distinctive provisions on notification, access, and consular immunity
which differ from the pattern of our previous consular conventiors, the con-
vention follows the standard pattern of such conventions. Like others it is a
bilateral treaty designed to regulate the activities and functions of consular
establishments and their officers and employees. The provisions governing these
activities and functions are comparable to those in our conventions with other
countries.
In my view this convention, which was carefully negotiated over an 8-month
period, is advantageous to our national interest. 1 he convention, if ratified, will,
of course, be a document of high value to both countries. It will provide much
needed regularization of traditional contacts between the two countries, affecting
the. flow of people, ships, and-of growing importance commerce. Conversely
it will supply a reference point to reduce unnecessary misunderstanding. Soviet
and American ways of doing things are often quite unlike. A common set of
ground rules is desirable. Since many more Americans visit the U.S.S.R. than
Soviet citizens visit the United States, the convention has special importance
for the United States. (About 1200 American tourists visited the '.S.S.R.
last year while only 201 Soviet tourists came to the United States.)
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Because we value so highly the protection of individual rights, the convention's
provisions on notification and access have particular significance. These clauses
should improve markedly the ability of the Department of State to protect and
assist the thousands of Americans who now visit the U.S.S.R. as tourists, on
business, or under the exchange program. The current practice in the Soviet
Union is to refuse access to arrested persons until after the completion of investi-
gation, which under Soviet law can extend for 9 months.
You probably recall the disappearance of Prof. Frederick Barghoorn in the
U.S.S.R. in 1963. Only after 12 days did our Embassy in Moscow learn of his
arrest, and the Soviet authorities never allowed our officials to visit him in prison.
If this convention had/been in effect in 1963, the Soviet authorities would have
been obliged to notify us of his arrest within 3 days and to grant us consular
access within 4 days.
The U.S.S.R. has never before given so specific a guarantee on access. Other
governments recognize the importance of the notification and access provision
in the U.S.-U.S.S.R. convention and have indicated an interest in obtaining these
benefits for themselves. The Japanese are currently preparing to negotiate a
consular convention with the Soviets and hope to achieve the same access and
notification provisions. The British are in the final stages of negotiating a
consular convention with the U.S.S.R. which incorporates these safeguards.
As an additional measure of protection, which we regard as important, the
convention contains a special provision on immunity for consular personnel.
Under this provision, they will be immune from criminal prosecution. Related
provisions of the convention will protect against abuse of such immunity by
Soviet consular officers. These provisions specify, first of all, the right of the
receiving state to declare consular personnel persona non grata. Thus by means
of a persona non grata action we would be able so remove from this country any
individual who abused his official privileges. The convention also states that
all persons enjoying immunity from criminal jurisdiction are obliged to respect the
laws and regulations of the receiving state, including traffic regulations. Finally
the convention provides for screening all nominees for consular assignments in
advance, so that we would not have to accept as a consul any Soviet citizen to
whom we objected.
The U.S.-U.S.S.R. Consular Convention, I wish to stress, does not itself
authorize the opening of any consulates in either country; it merely provides a
legal framework for their operation when opened. If the present convention is
ratified, the Department of State plans to discuss with Soviet representatives the
possibility of opening at least one American consulate in the Soviet Union.
Leningrad, the second largest city in the Soviet Union, is the most attractive of
several possible sites. The U.S.S.R. has not indicated where it might like to
open a consulate in this country. In any discussion of the establishment of con-
sulates we shall be sure that we receive at least as advantageous a location as
we give.
My remarks would not be complete if I did not invite the committee's attention
to the question whether this convention and any consulates established subse-
quently would result in opening the door to Communist espionage and subversion.
This possibility was, of course, carefully considered in consultation with other
responsible agencies of our Government before we signed the consular convention.
We are satisfied that the convention would not materially affect this problem.
If, after ratification of the convention, we agree to the opening of a Soviet con-
sulate in an American city, its employees will be subject to the same visa-screening
and entry controls as officers and employees of the Soviet Embassy in Washing-
ton. They would also be subject to the same travel restrictions as now apply
to Soviet officials assigned to Soviet missions in the United States. They would
be subject to the expulsion provision of the consular convention. Finally, the
relatively small number of consular officials would make little difference in the
total of Soviet citizens in the United States possessing immunity from criminal
jurisdiction. As of July 1, 1965, there were 847 Soviet citizens residing in the
United States, of whom 249 officials and 150 dependents had diplomatic immunity.
I think I have now covered the most significant aspects of this convention.
0
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040027-2