SECOND HEARING ON DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY, H.R. 3036

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 28
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 8, 2012
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: April 14, 1988
• Content Type: MEMO

rDeclassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00-005R00?1400160002-9
OCA FlEE
- 0 /
14 April 1988
OCA 88-1179
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT: Second Hearing on Diplomatic Immunity, H.R. 3036
1. On 13 April 1988, the Subcommittee on International
Operations, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, held a second
hearing on a bill to limit diplomatic immunity in certain
instances (H.R. 3036). Members attending were Representatives
Mica, Snowe and Smith. Copies of the available prepared
testimony are attached.
2. Representative Solarz, the sponsor of the bill, testified
first. He said the bill was designed to "square the circle"
protecting rights of U.S. diplomats abroad and citizens in the
U.S. against the wrongs of foreign diplomats. The consensus is
that more legislation is needed here. Between 1982 and 1988,
foreign diplomats in the U.S. committed 147 crimes. Forty-four
were committed in New York City. These include rape, murder and
assault.
3. Solarz refuted several arguments made by the Department
of State against various provisions in the bill. With respect to
the need to leave the names of diplomats out of reports on
crimes, these crimes have generally been given much publicity in
the press anyway. There is no reason to protect a rapist or
murderer from public exposure.
4. Regarding the section 3(c) objection prohibiting
interference with prosecution, Solarz said he can craft language
to allow State to communicate information to law enforcement
officials while precluding interference.
5. Concerning State's argument about the reentry provision,
there is no guarantee now that a PNG'd person cannot return in
the future. State cannot keep track of non-immigrant visas once
issued. Better coordination is needed, as is required by the
study.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
/r /,Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
6. Section 8 pertains to victim compensation and Solarz
stated that he has learned that 99 percent of all auto claims
fall within the required insurance amount. He agreed that
additional insurance would be unduly burdensome. He expressed
the same views with respect to section 9, which concerns
catastrophic insurance.
7. Section 10 mandates a review of the treatment of pouches
with a view towards ways to prevent the use of items fostering
terrorism. Solarz assumes the U.S. does not use the pouch to
ship explosives, weapons and the like, so that the U.S. need not
fear embarrassment from disclosure. He does believe other
countries use the pouch to transport such items. It may be that
the study will show no way to improve this situation, but Solarz
finds this hard to believe. The second part of the section does
not require the President tc impose procedures unilaterally, but
to seek changes in the Vienna Convention consistent with what is
learned from the review. State's argument that the U.S. uses the
pouch more than anyone, so it should ignore the problem, is no
ood.
8. Snowe suggested using the word "impede" to replace
"interfere" with regards to the interference with prosecution
issue. Solarz said this is similar to what he has in mind.
9. Gillian Sorensen, New York City Commissioner for the
United Nations and Consular Corps, testified next. She was
accompanied by Barry Koch, legal counsel. She said that to her
knowledge no murder has been committed by a diplomat within the
last 15 years. It may be that manslaughter has been committed.
Of the 44 crimes committed in New York, a good many were domestic
incidents and several others were misdemeanors. Only a handful
of diplomats have taken advantage of the system, but the bill
provides an opportunity to remedy the problems with that handful.
10. With respect to the accuracy of the State reports, she
said that there are numerous occasions when the initial report is
wrong and is corrected, but the press story containing the
inaccurate information persists. She also said that the pouch
should not he used to transport weapons or contraband and
suggested that the section 10 review continue.
11. Snowe asked what the Commission's relationship with
State is in these matters. Sorensen said there is discussion
between the two. The Commission is a mediator on a person-to-
person basis, but the police and State handle infractions of the
law. Koch said the Commission plays a secondary role to State
regarding who is entitled to immunity and so forth, and that the
2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
,
k
Commission has some role in liaison with the police. The
relationship has generally worked well. Sorensen said that the
one persistent problem is debt collection from certain countries,
although the debts are usually paid within a reasonable time.
12. Snowe asked if efforts to educate law enforcement
officials are successful. Sorensen said they are helpful and
extremely important. The police in the outer areas (boroughs and
counties of New York) are not as aware as those with closer ties.
13. Mica asked if the Commission has ever intervened before
a driving under the influence charge has been filed. Koch
answered no; the police almost always send them home. Sorensen
said that speeding tickets come to her office. To be dismissed,
certain criteria must be met. If there are a large number of
moving violations, the issue is taken up with State. The
Commission has never been told by State not to pursue a matter,
but State may move slowly on a matter because of political
concerns.
14. Steven Stein, chairman of the New York Bar Committee on
International Law testified next, accompanied by David van
Hoogstratten, a member of the same committee. Stein first
pointed out that the broad and unqualified grant of immunity
according to customary international law has been narrowed
greatly by the Vienna Convention. The problem is serious, but
not as large as the press portrays. State's statistics on this
are not accurate, however.
15. Stein went on to say that H.R. 3036 is a partial
legislative solution to a difficult problem. Section 2 has the
potential to be the most significant change. States have the
primary role in compensating victims, but it is really a Federal
job. Stein suggested establishing a Federal fund to take care of
victims in the 13 states having no victim compensation program.
16. Stein also suggested that the language of the bill be
broadened to include diplomats with immunity per bilateral and
multilateral agreements beyond the Vienna Convention, especially
the Soviet Union, China and bloc countries. He, too, is
concerned with the interference with prosecution provision.
17. Stein is also concerned with the second part of section
10. The Vienna Convention states that the diplomatic pouch
cannot be opened or detained. On balance, national security
interests outweigh any interest in searching pouches.
3
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
, 'Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
."`
2 ?
18. Snowe asked if. Stein has any cost estimates on the
Federal victim compensation system. Stein said he will work with
Congress on this. He anticipates there must be some savings if
the 37 programs now operating were condensed into one.
19. Smith asked if a nonintrusive, noninvasive examination
of the pouch is illegal, using for example dog-sniffing for drugs
and explosives. Stein thinks dog-sniffing is sensible and
suitable. Van Hoogstratten pointed out the problem of
reciprocity. Smith asked if it would be useful for State to
publish the names of perpetrators of crimes. Stein said there is
no harm in exposing wrongdoers. Mica noted that the U.S. is
about to build a new Moscow embassy by sending it through the
diplomatic pouch. Everyone has abused the pouch, but the abuse
has suddenly reached a new level.
20. Dennis Martin, President of the American Federation of
Police, then testified, followed by Perry Shankle, President of
the American Foreign Service Association and Susan Donnelly,
President of the Association of American Foreign Service Women.
21. Mica asked Shankle if he understands the subcommittee's
balancing problem vis-a-vis the pouch. Shankle said there is no
problem with the diplomatic pouch for the Foreign Service.
Martin said they know that drugs are coming through the pouches
and cannot do anything about this. Snowe asked if the U.S. can
refuse entry of the pouch. Martin said no.
22. Snowe asked if anything in the legislation is violative
of the Vienna Convention or would invite reciprocity. Shankle
said no, except for the insurance provisions. The interference
with prosecution provision is a bit of a problem, but he
understands it is being dealt with. Donnelly said nothing in the
bill takes away immunity. The problem is that if the U.S. takes
unilateral action, this may prompt other countries to say they
are just protecting their citizens. One cannot believe that
justice will prevail under other countries' legal systems. Some
interpretations of section 6 may allow reciprocity. Snowe asked
Shankle if he would recommend that the U.S. waive immunity when
similar legal systems are involved, such as in Canada and
Europe. Shankle said no and does not think the U.S. has ever
waived immunity.
23. Snowe asked what the U.S. does to ensure that its
citizens obey foreign laws. Shankle said people are sent home if
they have problems with drinking or misbehaving. He does not
know if State has reports on this. He does not think the U.S.
receives regular complaints, for Americans generally comply with
4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
the law. It is not so much the specifics of the language that
pose a problem, but the perception that the U.S. is weakening the
system of immunity that creates the reciprocity problem.
24. Because of the number of witnesses questioned in a short
period of time, Mica indicated there may be more questions
submitted for the record.
Attachments (4)
OCA/LEG
egis ation vis on
Office of Congressional Affairs
STAT
(14 April 1988) STAT
Distribution:
Original - OCA/Leg/Subject File: Diplomatic Immunity
1 - D/OCA
1 - DDL/OCA
- OCA Registry)
1-1- R}1 Signer
OCA Read
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Statement of
The Association of American Foreign Service Women
For the
Subcommittee on International Operations
Committee on Foreign Affairs
On
H.R. 3036
Presented by
Susan Donnelly, President of AAFSW
April 13, 1988
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Susan
Donnelly, President of the Association of American Foreign
Service Women (AAFSW). For almost thirty years AAFSW has served as
an advocate for the concerns of Foreign Service women, and
families either here or abroad, who are on the front lines of the
American diplomatic mission. We appreciate this opportunity to
testify on H.R. 3036. (Revision of Diplomatic Privileges and
Immunities Act)"
We applaud the concern expressed by members of this
subcommittee to address the issue of diplomatic rights and
privileges which the United States extends to members of foreign
missions resident in the United States. We support the testimony
of the Chief of Protocol, Selwa Roosevelt and John Condayan, of
the Office of Foreign Missions previously given before this
committee. We also support the testimony given by Evangeline
Monroe of the American Foreign Service Association. While they
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
are more able to address the issues of the total bill, our concern
lies primarily with the possible impact some of the proposed
changes in H. R. 3036 might have upon the lives of Foreign Service
family members, and the consequences of deviating from the present
agreements of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and
the Diplomatic Relations Act of 1978. In addition, we wish to
present a realistic view of the nature of our lives overseas,. and
the importance of being provided not only the physical security
but another type of security which is harder to define. And that
security is the protection guaranteed by the current laws
governing diplomatic rights and privileges. It is our hope that
in your effort to enact laws which protect American citizens, one
groups' rights are not jeopardized to compensate another.
We realize that abuses do occur among those persons holding
diplomatic immunity. We do not condone such abuses. We support
the measures outlined in the study and report concerning the
status of individuals with diplomatic immunity in the United
States compiled by the Department of State pursuant to the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act (FY 1988-89).
The Association of American Foreign Service Women views the
role of family, representation abroad as vital to the interests of
the United States. Despite the fact that family Members of the
five foreign affairs agencies are not paid employees of the United
States Government, we see ourselves as unofficial representatives
of the diversity of Americans lifestyles and values. In an
increasingly hostile world, we accompany our employed spouses to
nearly 300 American missions overseas. We sacrifice long term
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
career goals, endure prolonged absence from family members,
subject ourselves to often inadequate health care, and expose
ourselves to the security risks which have become all too common
in our overseas missions during the 1980's.
There are a great many myths which circulate about the nature
of our lifestyles abroad. The realities, while not as romantic,
are lived each day by members of our communities. The realities
of our lives at post are often conditioned by circumstances beyond
our control. Three areas which have a direct effect upon our
lives are the nature of the political systems in which we find
ourselves, the cultural differences between members of the
mission and host country nationals, and the legal systems in which
we must operate in order to function.
The political environment found in many of our posts is often
volatile. Participatory democracies are functioning rarities--
most often we find ourselves in posts where mob violence, strikes,
anti-American rhetoric and demonstrations are the norm. Add to
this the threat of terrorism and the psychological impact of
dealing with long term stress. Do we also have to deal with the
uncertainties decreased diplomatic immunity would bring?
Many countries operate within a system of values, which is
defined by the framework of their particular culture. Often these
values indirectly affect the quality of life of Americans posted
abroad in an official capacity. Sometimes cultural rules are
broken because of inadequate knowledge or insensitivity. In some
instances, there are legal ramifications due to these offenses.
If there were reciprocal actions taken against Americans abroad
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
due to a change in the status of diplomatic immunity, what type of
security would diplomats and their families have to protect
themselves against culturally defined lawbreaking?
Finally, consideration should be given to the fact that
members of American diplomatic missions function within a variety
of legal systems which do not operate under a "system of laws" as
we know it. In many parts of the world, jails do not have
facilities to adequately house lawbreakers. They do not serve
food, have ,running water and other sanitary amenities, and they
afford limited access for communication with detainees or prisoners.
While we recognize that diplomatic immunity was designed to
protect the Foreign Service employee, the extension of immunity to
family members was brought about by a realization that effective
employee job performance relied heavily upon the protection of the
employee's family members. This extension of immunity has
allowed family members to accompany employed spouses to post. This
has resulted in the establishment of overseas American schools,
and for the interaction between American families and host country
families in religious, sport, and social/cultural settings. This
interaction increases understanding and furthers the interests of
the U.S. government. If this interaction were put in jeopardy by
changing the nature of immunity, the quality of life for the
family living overseas would be changed, and the barriers erected
for security would grow to include barriers of cultural
interaction. Our lives overseas would be restricted to living in
walled compounds, to traveling only in groups, and finally to
little personal contact between family members and host country
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
-5_
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
nationals except on the Embassy/Consulate compound. This style of
interaction would not mirror our American values or support our
interests. In fact, many families would choose not to accompany
the employee to post, thus creating a whole new set of problems
and a skewed representation of American life.
We are aware that this legislation does not specificially
take away diplomatic immunity from U. S. government employees and
their families. Our concern lies in the area of reciprocity or
even malicious abuse by a host country unsympathetic to American
policy. We therefore ask you to consider carefully the reciprocal
nature of this proposed legislation upon the lives of our official
American diplomatic family serving abroad.
We, as members of our official American family abroad, take
great pride in representing the United States. We hope that we
can count on your support to make our representation a worthy
reflection of our American way of life.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
STATEMENT OF PERRY SHANKLE
PRESIDENT
AMERICAN FOREIGN SERVICE ASSOCIATION
before the
Subcommittee on International Operations
Committee on Foreign Affairs
on H.R. 3036
The Revision of Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Act
April 13, 1988
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am Perry
Shankle, President of the American Foreign Service Association.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee to
present AFSA's views on H.R. 3036, the Revision of Diplomatic
Privileges and Immunities Act.
AFSA is the professional association of members of the
Foreign Service and the exclusive representative of Foreign
Service employees in the Department of State and the Agency for
International Development. Most of these employees serve abroad
as representatives of the United States under the protection of
traditionally accepted standards of diplomatic immunity as
codified in international law and the Vienna Conyention.
AFSA supports the intent of this legislation to compensate
victims of crimes committed by foreign diplomats in the United
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
States. However, we are concerned about the effect of this
proposed legislation on the environment in which our own Foreign
Service personnel and their dependents work and live overseas.
While no one could argue that diplomatic immunity should be
used as a shield for criminal actions, AFSA is concerned that
altering our country's obligations under the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations could seriously jeopardize the freedom and
effectiveness of Americans who represent the United States at
foreign posts. Experience has shown that the system of
diplomatic immunity, imperfect as it is, is in our national
interest. Immunity is built on a system of reciprocity. What we
deny to foreign diplomats here will in turn be denied to our
colleagues and their families overseas. Our members serve in
countries with legal and political systems that are often sharply
at variance with ours where it is not uncommon that attempts are
made to harass and intimidate Americans stationed or visiting
there in an official capacity. In many situations, a healthy
respect for the concept of diplomatic immunity is all we have.
It is bad enough out there even with diplomatic immunity.
All of us have our own horror stories collected over the years,
but new ones continue to occur. For example, some recent
incidents: This fall, our economic counselor was arrested and
detained in Panama and held incommunicado for eight hours. He
had been observing, but not taking part, in a demonstration in
which someone was killed. Late into the night, our Ambassador
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
' Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
was finally able to find the jail in which he was being held.
Even where they are not taking action to deny our members their
rights, local law enforcement officials are often extremely
unhelpful, passive at best. In this case, two of our colleagues
were recently roughed up by Sandinista mobs in Nicaragua. The
police were aware of their diplomatic status, but did nothing to
assist them.
Some in the Foreign Service, because of the nature of their
duties and assignments, are excluded? from the diplomatic list,
and are already particularly vulnerable to the vagaries of local
laws and the local political systems. We fear that any action
the Congress might take to alter our obligations under the Vienna
Convention will invite more harmful reciprocal action by
unfriendly nations and will subject these individuals to even
greater risk.
Americans serving overseas are representative of our
country. They are typical Americans and as such they are
basically law abiding, respectful of the customs, culture, and
laws of the countries in which they are serving. They try to
stay out of trouble, to avoid potentially trouble-making
situations whenever they can, but, as typical Americans,
sometimes some of us do get in trouble. Laws are broken; customs
violated; people do stupid things. Individuals on occasion drive
under the influence of alcohol, or take drugs, or get in fights,
or commit even more serious crimes. Of course, AFSA does not
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
4,
condone the commission of unlawful acts by persons having
immunity, but neither do we want to turn them over to local
justice, particularly in some countries we could all think of.
Unlawful acts by our members do not often go unpunished, and they
should not. Our foreign affairs agencies act against employees
or their dependents who violate host country laws. Depending
upon the seriousness of the incident, they may be brought back to
the United States, to face sanctions by the United States
Government. More often than not, they are subject to
disciplinary or legal action, including separation from the
Foreign Service.
We also remain aware that there may be political motivation
for charging individuals with crimes that they have not
committed. A dependent teen age son or daughter of a senior
embassy official in a country where relations are tense, for
instance, could be picked up on some trumped up driving or drugs
charges as a way for that country to put pressure on us. Without
the strongest form of diplomatic immunity, such a situation could
turn into something horrible. And we do not feel that even those
official Americans who are legitimately charged with criminal
offenses should be at the mercy of the local justice system in
countries which do not share our fundamental concepts of the
presumption of innocence or the requirements of due process or
the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
AFSA is also concerned about the possible consequences of
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
that provision of the proposed legislation which requires
$1,000,000 per incident insurance coverage for injuries resulting
from the operation of any motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft.
We support the requirement of minimum insurance coverage, but we
do not want the costs of such insurance to be borne by individual
diplomats. We believe that such coverage would probably be too
costly for our members to afford, even if it were available in
foreign countries. It is also possible that some countries may
set unreasonably high premiums either as a revenue measure or to
retaliate against diplomats. We propose that section 8 be
amended by adding the words "by a Diplomatic Mission" after the
word "carried", to clarify that it is the diplomatic mission
itself which is required to carry such insurance.
I would be pleased to answer any questions the Committee may
have.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? a. ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
.0 ? ? ? ?
? *i? ?
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? St.
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF POLICE
Records Office
1100 N.E. 125th Street 1000 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 9
North Miami, FL 33161 Washington, D.C. 20036
[phone] [phone]
PRESIDENT
Deputy Sherift. Dennis Ray Martin
Sara.. Michigan
1ST VICE PRESIDENT
Ofsce, Josept, J McCaffrey ..k.
California State Patrol
Downey CA
2N0 VICE PRESIDENT
Deouty Brian L Wilson
DeFores? W,
SECRETARY-TREASURER
LI DY Van, Bode IV
FL Come P*evention Conan
Nc Warn,. FL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Chet Gerald S. Arenberg
FL Crime Prevention Comm.
No Ma:Tn. FL
NATIONAL CHAPLAIN
Rev Robert LAy
Beaky. NY
NATIONAL SGT. AT ARMS
Chief Gerald H. Mack
Amherst. NY
CONGRESSIONAL LIAISON
Col. Fred Pearson
Montgomery County Police. (Ret)
Bethesda MD
NATIONAL VICE PRESIDENTS
STANDING COMMITTEES
MEMBERSHIP
Co, LT Robert E Mahoney
Stater. Island NY
CORRECTIONS & JAILS
Oihoe'NkkS McCarty
Metro Dade Sheriffs Office
POLICE SURGEONS
Dr. Bruno J. Bevhino. MD
Westwood, MA
ORGANIZED CRIME
Officer Danis+ J. Meany It
Boston. MA
POLICE CHAPLAINS
Rabb; Dr seig Auerbach
Lake Placid NY
COMMUNICATIONS
Sp: Louis A Mention*
Pittston. PA
CAMPUS SECURITY
Sgt Douglas H Smith
San Mamas, TX
AWARDS & DECORATIONS
Range, Nicholas J Valtios
Dover Plams, NY
POLICE TRAINING
DI F Gerald SI Souvek
Amencan Pcitce Academy
Pontiac. Mi
SELF DEFENSE TACTICS
Purr, Bran C Smith
Chicago Hgts . IL
CRIME WATCH
Cent' Richa,d W Wassail
Mem. FL
POLICE HALL OF FAME
Chet Charlie J RetnoIds
Lindsay TX
ARSON & EXPLOSIVES
Plan Eugene C. Gushr. Sr.
San Antono TX
PAROLE & PROBATION
Officer A H Salida (Re.)
Fluslying.N
CRIME PREVENTION
Cot Leon Owner*
Sun Lakes. AZ
MEDIA RELATIONS
Lt Peter ki Finnegan
CaldwyF. 1, J
PRIVATE SECURITY LIAISON
Sec Oh Ton Paiiett Riss
Sat Franciscc CA
CO RANO PATROL
Instr Gene R Hut*,
Cucamonga CA
POLICE SURVIVAL & TACTICS
insoecto? U S Mashai Bin soot,
We. York NY
STATEMENT BY DEPUTY DENNIS RAY MARTIN
PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF POLICE
BEFORE THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON APRIL 13TH, 1988
SUBJECT: Diplomatic Immunity Problems and Training for Police
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, Ladies and Gentlemen:
My name is Dennis Ray Martin, National President of the 68,000 member
American Federation of Police, a nationwide non-profit federation of law
enforcement officers, which emphasizes excellence within the law
enforcement community by holding seminars and workshops throughout the
country.
I am the Director of Training for the Saginaw County Sheriffs Department,
and assist with training programs for eight other local law enforcement
agencies in Michigan. I represent and serve on over sixty national boards
and commissions promoting police professionalism at federal, state and
local levels, with a special concern for our national defense program.
I am here to represent law enforcement officers' concerns on diplomatic
crime, crimes committed by individuals who are presently exempt from
prosecution by reason of diplomatic immunity. We believe that no one is
above the law, yet a duality does exist. Our adversary in this situation is not
the traditional criminal, but the unique criminal with the broad coverage of
diplomatic immunity.
Justice, the lack of it, sends shivers down the back of our nation's law
enforcement community. No one, not even the president of the United
States, can commit a crime and then not face the consequences of that act.
Yet, we must deny our citizens access to our courts and the protections of
our laws, both criminal and civil, when it involves privileged immunized
individuals in the name of advancement of good relations with foreign
governments.
Granting special privileges or concessions to individuals who break the law
creates particular problems for the police. These privileges and concessions
are contrary to the oath and training that police officers are sworn to
uphold. These special protections afforded all employees of foreign
governments, who are present here as official representatives of their home
governments, are questionable. How can a multi-rapist identified in New
York City by victims not only walk out of the police station laughing, but
thwart justice on an international scale?
We are concerned that terrorrists could, and we have every reason to
believe, have shipped under the protection of diplomatic immunity Pouches
(over)
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
and such items as small armed weapons and explosives to be used against law enforcement
officers.
Our own committee chairman on intelligence and narcotics matters has advised me that
diplomatic credentials are sold by some nations for the purpose of preventing custom agents
from discovering drugs being brought in and money being shipped out under diplomatic
immunity or other criminal enterprises. Although we are bringing attention to the problems
diplomatic immunity may present, there has been relatively little written to assist the line
police officer in dealing with individuals with immunity.
A.F.P. polled several major departments in the Washington, D.C., New York area who
confess they lack adequate training in this area, finding the departments want to be kept
abreast of this very important legislation you are addressing today. The A.F.P. took on the
task of preparing and training police regarding the privileges and immunities that foreign
diplomats and consular personnel possess. A.F.P. has distributed hundreds of law
enforcement training pocket manuals which were developed to assist officers who must
confront foreign. diplomats and consular personnel on a daily basis. We believe foreign
diplomats who violate traffic laws should be cited. Allegations of serious crimes should be
fully investigated, promptly reported to the Department of State and procedurally
developed to the maximum permissible extent.
Both the staff and membership of the A.F.P. would like to commend Mrs. Roosevelt, Chief
of Protocol, and her staff for assisting us with developing our non-traditional training
workshops and pocket manual on the legal issues of immunity. I would like to point out that
the Department of State enthusiastically received, endorsed and assisted A.F.P. with
development of training and education efforts, as it applies to diplomatic immunity. In our
great Nation legislators frame and construct our laws, attorneys study, interpret and present
the law, our judges make the final interpretations and applications of the law and impose
sanctions. But, we the law enforcement officers must apply the law immediately, give it its
effectiveness, and execute the law in a direct personal fashion.
The passage of this bill will send a clear message to those lawbreakers who know our hands
have been tied by the present laws, that they will no longer be able to wave a paper called
diplomatic immunity and walk away scott free.
Let me conclude by saying thank you for allowing me to speak before you today. I feel that I
represent the general response of our nation's 600,000 full time police officers and the
millions of. Americans we serve.
Thank you!
Dennis Ray Martin
National President
American Federation of Police
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
DIPLOMATIC
IMMUNITY
A TRAINING GUDE FOR
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
1. BACKGROUND
As a result of custom, international treaty, and federal
legislation, diplomats from around the world are granted im-
munity to both the criminal and civil laws. The type and
amount of immunity depends upon th...; nature of the diplo-
mat's official position, and the type of activity engaged in.
Accordingly, a diplomat who has full diplomatic immu-
nity may not be arrested or held for any crime or civil wrong
he commits. While this might at first glance seem unfair, it
must be remembered that our diplomats in other countries are
accorded the same privileges and immunities.
Your role as a police officer will depend upon the nature
of the immunity given to the individual, and the nature of the
reason for your contact with that individual. You should use
this training guide as a guide only, and use the telephone
numbers supplied in Section IV in case there is any doubt as
to the appropriate action or response.
I I CLASSES OF DIPLOMATS
All persons who claim diplomatic privileges or immunities
should be able to produce a valid identification card issued by
the federal government. This card will in most cases verify the
nature and extent of immunity. If for some reason the I.D.
cannot be produced, the telephone numbers listed in Section
IV of this bulletin can be used to verify the existence or ab-
sence of such immunity.
A. Diplomatic Missions: These are the people who com-
prise the diplomatic corps of their country to the United
States. They are divided in to three classes depending on the
type of functions performed.
I. Diplomatic officers are the persons sent by a foreign
nation to deal directly with our nation over concerns of state.
These peopie, and members of their immediate family, enjoy
full and absolute immunity to all criminal and civil laws. They
may not be arrested or held for a period longer than necessary
to determine their status. Neither they or their belonging can
be searched, detained in any way, or otherwise subjected to
any legal process.
2. Members of administrative and technical staff per-
form tasks considered to be crucial for the proper functioning
of an embassy. Accordingly the have immunity to all criminal
proceedings. And may not be compelled to testify in any pro-
ceeding. They may however, be liable to civil suits for actions
that are not official acts:
3. Members of service staff are the persons who per-
form mostly menial tasks, or tasks of a non-diplomatic nature
such as house cleaning, gardening or driving embassy vehi-
cles. These persons enjoy only official acts immunity for both
criminal and civil acts. These people are subject to arrest.
B. Members of International Organizations: These are
the official representatives of foreign governments to interna-
tional organizations located in the United States such as the
Plates as shown here are issued by the U.S. State Department
and indicate immunity from parking violations. While tickets
can and should be issued to document serious breech of con-
duct, there is no way to collect fines. Citizens often feel the
immunity is a violation when they are towed or fined and
others are "immune."
United Nations or the Organization of American States.
These are also divided into three classes, and the privileges
and immunities parallel their function as does those members
of embassies.
Use the accompanying chart, and the telephone numbers
provided in Section IV to resolve any questions as to the ap-
propriate actions.
C. Consular Officers: Besides their embassies, foreign
government may maintain other offices in this country to
carry out various business matters, or to provide services to
their nationals in this country. While they do have some
forms of immunity, this is usually less than that afforded to
diplomatic agents. Use the accompanying chart, or call the
numbers provided for further clarification.
D. Automobiles: All automobiles and drivers licences are
issued by the Department of State, and both registration
plates and licenses should indicate that some form of immu-
nity is possessed by the bearer. License plates are usually
coded with prefix or suffix matching the type of immunity.
Therefore a "D" would indicate the car belonged to a diplo-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
d Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Office of Foreign Missions
U.S. Department of State
DIPLOMATIC MOTOR
VEHICLE PROGRAM
The U.S. Department of State issues drivers' licenses, motor vehicle registrations
and license plates to qualified, accredited foreign mission personnel and their
family members. Department licenses, registrations and license plates replace
those issued to foreign mission personnel and their family members by state or
local jurisdictions. Samples appear below.
11 11 4iIiiItIllA __1067,7136:2100 ?s-'
03/24/513 06/34191
0102002 ,,,, 5?,... sE, ov,
1 024 74
0?0000.0. 0 4. 00120
06/24/04
Milt ORM
?61CDS, SOS
2.101D110.:
DOT. FUME OSITSI?S LIME.
DOC ?ElitO FARMS
101
m.o.. pc nee,
...... DOE
sax, 1
WEI., 110 EDS.
ElE DAIDI
DOS, vn.,1Ar. SAM,.
100 AP, SPRPLI
3
MV3I.=?P=I DADDINCSON, DC 2000E
DRIVERS' LICENSES
The Diplomatic Motor Vehicle Office (DMVO) of the Office of
Foreign Missions, U.S. Department of State. issues drivers' licensee
to qualified, accredited foreign mission personnel and their family
members in the United States. Once DMVO licenses have replaced
existing licenses issued by state and local jurisdictions, the Depart-
ment will exercise exclusive authority to license foreign mission
personnel and their family members. Drivers of vehicles with diplo-
matic license plates will be required to carry DMVO licenses. For-
eign licenses are valid only for thirty days after the holdees date of
arrival in the United States. The temporary DMVO license is valid for
up to six months; the permanent DMVO license is valid for five years
and does not bear the holder's signature. The Department should
be notified of all violations written against diplomatic licenses.
0119988 604,
MEM VENIRE DED/STRATION
RATE DS .141ELE 11.4TIFICAlsEsi .. DODE DOOEs 0004
450000150000.,10D 04 IC. DED .
DEO. DATE
0041.44.
0.1:4/09
00E. JOSEID4 ...Ls
444 imDFDS VERDE, DED. FEE
.9mmOTIOn. OE =S.
CO-DIEDEF..S,
VEHICLE REGISTRATION
All vehicles owned and/or operated by accredited foreign mission
personnel and their family members must be registered with the
U.S. Department of State. The registration card indicates the
name(s) of the registered owner(s). Titles are not issued upon
registration and may be obtained only at time of sale or export.
UCENSE PLATES
Vehicles registered with the U.S. Department of State must display
these license plates which replace those issued by state or local
jurisdictions. Foreign license plates are valid only for thirty days
after the vehicle's date of arrival in the United States. Dealer's
temporary tags may be displayed on newly purchased vehicles for
up to thirty days. Department diplomatic plates are property of the
Federal Government and must be returned to the Department upon
demand or termination of employment with a mission. Lost or
stolen plates must be reported immediately to the number below.
The Office of Foreign Missions, through the Diplomatic Motor Vehicle Office, is responsible for assuring that
diplomats operating vehicles are treated uniformly and in accordance with local and federal regulations, and
international law. Diplomatic license plates indicate that the operator of a vehicle may be 1) unfamiliar with American
customs and the English language, 2) unfamiliar with local driving practices and/or 3) entitled to diplomatic
immunity.
General information on vehicles with diplomatic license plates:
? They must carry a minimum of $300,000 liability insurance.
? They are subject to issuance of traffic citations.
? They may not be towed (unless posing a danger to public safety), impounded, or subjected to search
? May not be subject to inspection in some states. Consult state police.
? May not be sold or exported without State Department approval.
? Law enforcement agencies may verify diplomatic registrations through NLETS (state code is "US").
Inquiries should be directed to:
U.S. Department of State
Office of Foreign Missions
Diplomatic Motor Vehicle Office
M/OFM/DMVO SA-20
Washington, D.C. 20520
The Phone Number is: [phone]
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
United States Department of State
Office of Protocol
IDENTIFICATION CARDS
? The United States Department of Stale, Office of Protocol, has begun issuing new identification documents to embassy personnel. It is estimated
that issuance of these credentials will he condpeted by mid-1988. Subsequently, new identiy documents still be issued to consular personnel. During
this change. there will he two types of diploniatic identification cards in circulation: some persons will still have the old ID cards while other persons
will have the new cards. Samples of both types of ID's are provided here. Because there are different degrees of immunity. law,enforcement officers
should read iarefidly identification cards presented to them. Questions regarding an individual's status or immunity should be referred during work-
ing hours to the Office of Protocol, 202/647-4294; after hours to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, 202/647-2412.
CURRENT
D I l' 1.0 \I I (
1)1 \ I I It 1111)N
I kIZI)
NEW
DIPLOMATIC
IDENTIFICATION CARD
UNITED STATES
DErARTMENT Of STATE
nuoissu RU-85-4571-51
IMOE 0430/90
?an tor oat*. 03/09/42
1:!
(Photo)
"atm JEAN D. HARRIS SARIPLR. -
orme COUNSELOR
wadi HL1RITANI A
WCATIOM WASHINGTON, DC
1:4 WEE NEVEREE RIX FOR IITAVERRICT OF INISUMTV.
This person has been duly notified to Ihe Dirpaninent of Slate and
under International tar enasys immunity from criminal jurisdiction.
The being, shall not be liable to any form of arm., or detention. but
may be given a notice of violation.
The bearer shad be treated with due relliplKt and ell ?OPPilPfleiti NPR*
Shalt be taken to prevent any attest, on the bearer'. person. freodom
or dIgnhy.
Chief 01 Protocol
Law ENFORCEMENT iliOutillES SHOULD
BE DIRECTED TO120.21 647.1mm FROM
USA TO SAM EASTERN TIME AND
(2OZ611.2412 AT All OTHER TIMES
IF FOUNO. RETURN TO
Orrice or Protocol
Cwouvivrot si Stow
wosworpon. OC MAlE
Rouyn postage goatameem
mop" oar mot veto tea ss sr.. co
BLUE bordered cards are issued to diplomatic officers and their families. They are entitled to full
criminal immunity and may not be arrested or detained.
Matic officer, a "C" for a consular officer, and a "S" for a
staff or technical officer.
E. Drivers Licences: The Department of State also issues
drivers licenses to diplomats and their staffs. These are issued
for a period of six months in the case of temporary ones, and
for five years for permanent ones. In the absence of official
I.D. cards, the drivers license may help substantiate the claim
to immunity, but the officer should check with the govern-
ment by calling the appropriate telephone number supplied in
Section IV.
I I POLICE GUIDELINES
A. Violent and Life-Threatening Situations: In circum-
stances where the public safety is endangered, or it is apparent
that a serious crime is about to be committed, the police may
intervene to the extent necessary to halt the activity, to protect
the citizens, or to protect themselves.
B. Waiver and P.N.G. Procedure: Even though a diplo-
mat is entitled to immunity, all incidents, including traffic of-
fenses, should be reported to the Department of State. The
department can ask the government of the diplomat to waive
immunity which would subject the individual to our courts. If
the waiver is refused, the diplomat can be declared persona
non grata. This would force the foreign government to call
the diplomat home, and make him of her ineligible for diplo-
matic status in this country.
C. Traffic Offenses: Stopping a diplomatic officer and is-
suing a citation does not constitute an arrest, and is therefore
allowed. You may not require a signature. You should always
follow your normal procedure in stopping a traffic violation.
Issue a citation, and report the incident even though it may
later be determined that the individual does not have to ap-
pear in court.
I. Drunk Driving: Sobriety tests may be offered, but
not compelled. The officer may prevent the individual from
driving if he determines that the person is intoxicated. De-
pending on the circumstances, the officer may:
a. With his permission, take the individual to the
station or other location until sober enough to
drive;
b. summon a friend, relative or employee to drive;
c. call a taxi for the individual; and
d. if appropriate, the police could provide transpor-
tation home.
2. Motor Vehicles: In the normal course of events, the
motor vehicle of a person enjoying full immunity may not be
searched, impounded, or "booted." They may however, be
moved far enough to prevent them from being a hazard.
Should the vehicle prove to be stolen, or to have been used by
an unauthorized person the commission of a crime, it may be
searched and impounded.
D. Make Reports and File Investigations: The U.S. State
Department depends on thorough and complete investiga-
tions that may involve someone with diplomatic status. Even
with the knowledge that whatever you may do may not result
in either an arrest, fine or action, the State Department de-
pends on you in the field. A report on every incident should
be made. A copy sent to the U.S. State Department by your
agency. Indeed the incident may be isolated. It could be how-
ever something more serious.
For an example, it is possible that a diplomat or agent of a
foreign government is in an accident in your community. It
might be of interest to the State Department as well as other
agencies that a particular nation or individual was in your
area which might be "restric%.d" for sonic reason. Or possi-
bly the person has had a series of accidents or problems that
are far too frequent.
Because of your report and others, that individual may be
asked to leave the United States. Few foreign governments
want to be represented by people that give their country a bad
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
name. They may be advised by the State Department of a
? "problem' that they were not aware about. Concerning a
person in their service. So, these reports both good and bad
are very helpful. They are only of value if copies are sent to
the State Department or called in if urgent by phone.
Remember too that we must protect the diplomats. Thus
your concern and assistance to a foreign diplomat is just as
important as it is to any citizen of our own nation. If you have
such contact where you have aided in an accident, illness or
incident these too should be filed.
These men, women and children are strangers in this na-
tion. Our customs and dress may be new or not the same in
their homeland. As a police officer you may indeed be the
person who makes the first and lasting impression! Fairness,
cooperation and kindness are what You would expect when
traveling abroad. That is what we implore of our police to do
in every possible case where it is abvious of misunderstand-
ings, etc. However, in no manner should you ignore criminal
activity or conduct that is a public danger.
E. Language Problems: We seem to expect everyone to
speak English. However, it is possible that you may run into a
language barrier. Especially in an emergency situation or acci-
dent. There is a national company that serves police depart-
ments that can (by radio or phone) handle almost every lan-
guage spoken in the world. Many large police agencies have
contracts for this service. The company name is C.A.L.L.
(Communication and Language Line), 177 Webster Street,
Monterey, California 93940; [phone].
You might want to have a state or county-wide contract
not only to handle diplomatic problems but for any situation
where language may be a problem. Of course a call the the
U.S. State Department would also give you help. Our duty is
to help diplomats just as we would help any other person. The
few diplomats or employees that are problems must not cloud
or prejudice us in our duty to the vast majority who serve with
dignity and honor. Also keep in mind that the United States
has diplomats, consuls and staff worldwide. What we do here
may effect their status and ability to serve our nation over-
seas.
1 YTELEPHONEINFORMATION/VERIFICATION
A. Diplomatic and Consular Personnel and International,'
Organizations Other than United Nations:
1. Normal Business Hours:
a. Status of drivers licenses, registration, or other
motor vehicle information: (202) 322-10955
b. Diplomatic agents and their family
members: [phone] t
c. Administrative and technical, service staff
and families: [phone];
2. After Normal Business Hours:
a. Command Center: Bureau of Diplomatic
Security: [phone]
B. United Nations Personnel:
1. Normal Business Hours:
a. Host Country Section: [phone]
2. After Business Hours:
a. Communication Section of the U.S.
Mission: [phone]
rati.c,.r.
Ma, Be Arrested
or Detained
Residence 'Ala Be
Entered Subject to
Ordinar Procedures
Ma, be Issued
Traffic Citation
Ma be Subpoenaed
as Witness
May be
Prosecuted
Recogni7ed
Family Member
1:, ploniatic >gent
No'
No
Yes
No
No
Same as sponsor 'full immunity iS
inviolability,.
.teniber of Admin.
and Tech. Staff
No'
No
Yes
No
? No
Same as sponsor dull immunity a
ins inlability i.
SerNice Staff
Yes
Yes
Yes
l'es
No?for official
acts. Otherwise.
Yes'
No immunity or inviolability.'
Career Consular
Officers
Yes. if for a felony
& pursuant to a
warrant'
Yes'
Yes
No?for official acts.
Testimony may not be
compelled in any case.
No?for official
acts. Otherwise.
Yes'
No immunity or inviolability.'
Honorably Consular
Officers
Yes
Yes
Yes
No?for official acts.
Yes, in all other cases.
No?for official
acts. Otherwise.
Yes
No immunity or inviolability.
Consular Emploees
_
Yes'
Yes
Yes
No?for official acts.
Yes, in all other cases.
No?for official
acts. Otherwise.
Yes'
No immunity or inviolability.'
International
Organisation
Staff'
Yes'
Yes'
Yes
Yes'
No?for official
acts. Otherwise.
Yes'
No immunity or inviolability.
Diplomatic-Level
Staff of Missions
to Intl Orgs.
No' 1
I
No
Yes
No
No
Same as sponsor (full immunity a
inviolability I.
Support Staff of
Missions to
International
Organizations
Yes
Yil?
Yei -
No?for official ,
acts. Otherwise. I
Tao
No immunity or inviolability.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
' Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
STATEMENT OF GILLIAN SORENSEN
NEW YORK CITY COMMISSIONER FOR THE
UNITED NATIONS AND CONSULAR CORPS
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
SUBCOMMITTEE
ON INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H.R. 3036
April 13, 1988
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I am Gillian
Sorensen, New York City's Commissioner for the United 4
Nations and Consular Corps. I appear here today with my
Deputy Commissioner and Legal Counsel, Barry Koch, pursuant
to Chairman Mica's invitation to provide the Commission's
views on H.R. 3036, a bill "To provide redress for crimes
committed by diplomats in the United States, and for other
purposes."
I would like to thank the Committee for inviting my
participation. The City of New York is host to the largest
diplomatic and consular communities in the world, and has a
keen interest in discharging its "Host City" obligations
effectively and in accordance with domestic and
international legal obligations. We have, together with the
City's police department, the Criminal Justice Coordinator
and the Mayor, analyzed H.R. 3036 and are prepared to
address certain specific areas of the bill. I would like
first, however, to make some general remarks.
The Commission has, since 1962, represented the Mayor
as official liaison between the City of New York and the
diplomatic community. The Commission is, principally a
service and problem-solving agency that responds to the
needs of some 35,000 foreign diplomats, consular officers,
United Nations officials, their staffs and families. We
respond as well to the needs of New York City agencies and
citizens who deal with diplomatic offices and personnel. We
try to reduce the burdens and problems presented by the
presence of the diplomatic community by serving as an
information source, complaint bureau, and discreet and
impartial mediator. The Commission is an apolitical agency
that deals with every country represented at the U.N.,
including those that have no diplomatic relations with
Washington. We are accountable to the Mayor, and not to the
United States Department of State, although we do work
periodically with the State Department on various matters.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
I would state formally at the outset that we believe
that immunity is indeed essential to the conduct of
diplomatic relations. It protects almost 30,000 Americans
and their families posted overseas. Congressman Solarz, in
an earlier statement concerning this bill, stated wisely
that
Everyone in this room today accepts the proposition
that U.S. diplomats stationed abroad need the
protection offered by the Vienna Convention. Indeed,
because of the inadequate nature of many judicial
systems overseas, our diplomats rely on the protection
offered by diplomatic immunity far more than foreign
diplomats serving in the United States.
Diplomatic immunity was never intended, however, to serve as
a shield from justice or a license to violate our laws.
This Committee has been considering what Congressman
Solarz referred to as "a truly troubling situation--the
abuse of the system of diplomatic immunity, and the almost
total inability of the victims of crimes committed by
persons protected by diplomatic immunity to seek redress."
Certainly we have an obligation to respond appropriately to
abuses of this system. Likewise, we have a responsibility
to address the perception--sensationalized by the
media--that diplomats are literally "getting away with
murder" and that our government is insensitive to the
problem, due to its pursuit of larger foreign policy
objectives.
At the same time, however, we must look to the facts if
we are to make a responsible assessment of the problem.
In examining the precise nature of the crime problem,
we direct attention to the "Study and Report Concerning the
Status of Individuals with Diplomatic Immunity in the United
States", prepared by the U.S. Department of State, March 18,
1988. Exhibits B-2(a), (b) and (c) list 44 cases in New
York where diplomats were alleged to have committed a crime,
during the 5-1/2 year period, 8/1/82 through 2/29/88.
Thirteen of these cases involved assault allegations, but 6
of the 13 were family disputes or quarrels between
diplomats; and at least 10 of these cases involved
non-violent misdemeanors. We would point also to Exhibit
A-2 of the Study and Report, "Special Cases--Unpaid Debts"
(Missions to the United Nations). A careful analysis of
these statistics must lead, we believe, to the following
conclusions:
--The incidence of abuse of immunity from
jurisdiction--both criminal-and civil--is extremely
low;
-2-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R0014001nnnn9_,a
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
?
--The majority of diplomats and their family members
are honorable and law-abiding people;
--Only a relative handful of irresponsible persons and
Missions have taken advantage of the system.
Nevertheless, there is certainly a need to pursue this relative
handful, and we believe the bill offers several valuable
improvements to the ability to do so. We wish to express our
support for and agreement with much of what the bill seeks to
address. ?We will indicate where we foresee certain practical
problems or adverse reciprocity consequences. We will now
address the specific sections of the bill.
Victims Compensation
We do not oppose section 2, which would amend the
federal Victims of Crime Act of 1984. We note, however,
that the amendment would not affect the Victim's Compensation
program currently in place in New York State. Other than
creating uniform eligibility requirements among the states
which currently have Victims Compensation programs, the
amendment would not increase federal funds available for such
state programs and would not provide any federal funds for
victims injured in states without such programs. To that
extent, it does not really "provide [additional] redress for
crimes committed by diplomats." We would, therefore, urge
continued efforts be made toward exploring other possible
sources of relief. These might include a federal
indemnification fund or some other type of Treasury
appropriation. We, too, believe, as stated by Ambassador
Roosevelt, the U.S. Chief of Protocol, in her March 30, 1988
testimony before this Committee, that
[T]he beneficiary of diplomatic immunity fundamentally
is the United States Government because United States
diplomatic personnel abroad could not function without
immunity. Thus, uncompensated crimes are a necessary
cost of the conduct of foreign relations, and it is
reasonable for the United States Government to bear
this cost.
We note the Department of State's conclusion that "the
funding required for such a program would be relatively
modest."
We note also Ambassador Roosevelt's statement that the
Department of State "makes a great effort to secure
compensation [for victims,] and has been involved in
securing ex qratia payments by foreign governments to
injured parties." Since certain sections of the bill seek
to establish reporting requirements, we would suggest that
the Committee consider adding to this section a reporting
requirement similar to that contained in section 3,
-3-
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
so that there will be a permanent record of the efforts
exerted by the Department of State toward this end, and the
success or failure of these efforts. We believe an injured
party would have a keen interest in the details of such
efforts exerted on his behalf.
Record-keeping and Reporting
We support the record-keeping and reporting
requirements of section 3(a). We would point out, however,
that there is no requirement that the record include a
description of the disposition of the incident; we recommend
that section 3(a) be amended to include such a requirement.
We also note that there is no mention whether this report is
to be 'Tiede available to the public. While we believe that
public disclosure of the identities of individual diplomats
might be unwise, we suggest that the other information
should be available to the public. In addition, we
recommend that a record be kept of all instances where
allegations of criminal conduct by a diplomat are
investigated, and it is concluded that the allegations ate
unfounded. We have noted several instances where the press
continues to refer to thinly supported allegations,
resulting in the besmirching of an innocent individual's
reputation. One notable example involves the 1981 case
where a pedestrian was struck and killed by an automobile
operated by the son of a diplomat. The press account
typically refers to how the driver got away with murder by
virtue of his diplomatic immunity. The fact is that
diplomatic immunity was not invoked, the diplomat's son and
the sending government cooperated fully with the police in
their investigation, and after a full investigation the
police ruled the incident an accident or suicide and
declined to prosecute.
We note that the term "serious criminal offense" is not
defined. We recommend that the term be defined to include
all felonies under the law of the jurisdiction where the act
occurred, all incidents of reckless driving or driving while
intoxicated, and such other offenses as the Secretary may
deem to be serious criminal offenses.
We strongly support Ambassador Roosevelt's proposal to
include information concerning "delinquency in the payment
of debts owed by foreign missions and members of such
missions and their families", which remain outstanding for
six months or more. We recommend that section 3(a) be
amended to add such a formal record-keeping and reporting
requirement. In this connection, we would support language
establishing a minimum set of procedures to be followed by
the State Department when pursuing such debts. We have
witnessed in New York, although it is clearly the rare case,
debt matters that were not pursued as aggressively as they
might have been, due to various political considerations.
-4-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
'
We believe this type of report should be publicly available
and that the public has a right to know who the delinquent
governments are.
Finally, we would like to address a point raised by the
State Department in its Study and Report and in its
testimony to this Committee concerning the availability of
the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 as an avenue of
possible recourse to creditors and other individuals with
tort claims (such as persons injured in automobile
accidents) against a foreign mission. Although such
citizens do have a legal right to pursue such claims in U.S.
courts, we have observed that it is the rare instance where
an aggrieved New Yorker can, from a practical standpoint,
seek recourse pursuant to this Act. Commencing a lawsuit
under the FSIA can be extremely expensive and logistically
difficult, and executing a judgment can often be impossible.
We believe that the State Department should continue to take
the lead in pursuing such matters.
We support section 3(b), which addresses efforts
directed at "Education and Encouragement of Local Law
Enforcement Individuals", and wish to acknowledge the
positive impact such efforts by the State Department have
already had in New York City.
We do not support section 3(c) as currently worded.
First, the term "interference" is vague, and we do not think
such a blanket prohibition would assist the efforts of local
law enforcement personnel. Clearly, the State Department
would and should have a degree of involvement when a
diplomat is alleged to have been involved in the commission
of a crime. In fact, the New York City Police Department's
Patrol Guide mandates that the U.S. Mission to the U.N. be
notified when a diplomat is arrested or alleged to be
involved in the commission of a crime. We believe that
clarification of this prohibition is necessary so that the
Department of State would be permitted to play its proper
role when such incidents occur, and the local authorities
would be able to request assistance on legal and other
matters more typically within the expertise of the
Department. Second, the clause "not covered by immunity
from criminal jurisdiction of the United States under the
Vienna Convention", as currently placed, can be read to
modify subsections (A), (B) and (C), rather than just (C)
alone. We suspect, but are not certain, that this is an
interpretation that the Congress did not intend, and we
recommend clarification.
We support the State Department's position, as
expressed by Ambassador Roosevelt, on sections 4 and 5(a)
and (b). Sections 5(c), 6 and 7 are matters between the
State Department and the Congress in which we express no
position.
-5-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
?
Minimum Insurance Coverage
We do not support section 8, which would raise the
minimum amount of insurance required to be carried for
injury resulting from the operation of any motor vehicle,
vessel, or aircraft to $1,000,000 per incident. Our
experience in New York leads us to agree with the
conclusions expressed by Mr. John Condayan, Acting Director
of the Office of Foreign Missions, in his March 30, 1988
testimony to this Committee, namely,
[T]he existing insurance limits can reasonably be
expected to afford adequate compensation for injury to
persons or property resulting from or arising out of
automobile accidents...[and that] an increase in
minimum coverage to $1,000,000 would require a
substantial increase in premiums, and would lead to the
unavailability of insurance for some foreign mission
personnel. If enacted, the section could have serious
and harmful reciprocity effects on U.S. personnel
abroad.
In connection with the larger picture of the automobile
insurance program coordinated by OFM, we wish to add here
that we are aware of several instances where underwriters
failed to notify OFM of the lapse of an individual insured's
policy, despite being required to do so. A subsequent claim
can then be "uncovered". We would recommend consideration
of additional measures that might be implemented to address
these occasional "gaps" in coverage.
Liability Insurance
We support section 9. We do not dispute the State
Department's finding as to the general unavailability of
what it refers to as "crime insurance." However, we support
the flexible language of this section which requires
continued appropriate steps be taken to afford adequate
compensation to injured persons. As noted above at page 5,
we do not believe that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
provides a meaningful avenue of recourse in these cases.
Diplomatic Pouch
We have reviewed section 10, which speaks about the
diplomatic pouch. Clearly, the City has an interest in
ensuring that the pouch is not used for transport of weapons
and other contraband. We appreciate the State Department's
expressed view that "on balance...our interest as a sender
requires that we seek, to the maximum extent possible, to
preserve the integrity of the pouch", and that use of the
diplomatic pouch "is vital to the operations of our missions
abroad and the accomplishment of our foreign policy and
national security objectives." If, therefore, the Congress
-6-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
' Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9
? -
has in mind at this time implementation of specific measures
which could result in adverse reciprocity consequences or be
deemed to violate our international treaty obligations, we
would oppose section 10. However, if section 10 is intended
primarily to express Congress' wish for ongoing review, we
would support section 10 with a recommendation that the word
"will" in line 10 be replaced with the words "seek to." We
believe that requiring periodic review of these policies is
prudent, and that the language of section 10 as modified, is
sufficiently broad so as to leave the President with enough
discretion to reject "measures" deemed inappropriate.
Finally, I wish to refer briefly to two points made in
the State Department's earlier testimony. First, we agree
with the suggestion made by Ambassador Roosevelt to grant
the various functions contemplated by the bill generally to
the Secretary of State for delegation of responsibilities as
he deems necessary and appropriate. Our experience with the
Office of Protocol and the Office of Foreign Missions has
been positive, and absent some specific finding to the
contrary, we do not see the need for legislative
reorganization. Second, the bill's reference to the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations as the source of immunity
is too narrow to cover the range of persons we suspect that
Congress seeks to cover in this legislation. As the State
Department correctly points out, "under bilateral and
multilateral agreements and customary international law,
certain other personnel are entitled to this immunity." We
would, therefore, recommend amending the definition in
section 3(e) and all related Sections to cover this broader
category of persons.
In closing, I wish to express my appreciation for this
opportunity to present New York City's views on these
matters. We welcome the Congressional interest in this area
and look forward to working with you in making constructive
changes.
-7-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/08: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400100002-9