[Senate Treaty Document 105-21]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                              Treaty Doc.
                                SENATE

 1st Session                                                     105-21
_______________________________________________________________________


 
              EXTRADITION TREATY WITH TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

   EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
 AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, SIGNED AT PORT OF 
                         SPAIN ON MARCH 4, 1996





 July 31, 1997.--Treaty was read the first time and, together with the 
accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and 
            ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate


                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                    The White House, July 31, 1997.
To the Senate of the United States:
    With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the 
Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition 
Treaty between the Government of the United States of America 
and the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, signed at Port of 
Spain on March 4, 1996.
    In addition, I transmit, for the information of the Senate, 
the report of the Department of State with respect to the 
Treaty. As the report explains, the Treaty will not require 
implementing legislation.
    The provisions in this Treaty follow generally the form and 
content of extradition treaties recently concluded by the 
United States.
    This Treaty will, upon entry into force, enhance 
cooperation between the law enforcement communities of both 
countries and thereby make a significant contribution to 
international law enforcement efforts. Upon entry into force, 
it will supersede the Extradition Treaty between the United 
States and Great Britain signed at London on December 22, 1931, 
and made applicable to Trinidad and Tobago upon its entry into 
force on June 24, 1935, and which the United States and 
Trinidad and Tobago have continued to apply following Trinidad 
and Tobago's independence. That treaty has become outmoded, and 
the new Treaty will provide significant improvements.
    I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable 
consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to 
ratification.

                                                William J. Clinton.


                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                       Department of state,
                                         Washington, June 13, 1997.
The President,
The White House.
    The President: I have the honor to submit to you the 
Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States 
of America and the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (the 
``Treaty''), signed at Port of Spain on March 4, 1996. I 
recommend that the Treaty be transmitted to the Senate for its 
advice and consent to ratification.
    The Treaty follows closely the form and content of 
extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. 
The Treaty represents part of a concerted effort by the 
Department of State and the Department of Justice to develop 
modern extradition relationships to enhance the United States 
ability to prosecute serious offenders including, especially, 
narcotics traffickers and terrorists.
    The Treaty marks a significant step in bilateral 
cooperation between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago. 
Upon entry into force, it will supersede the Extradition Treaty 
between the United States and Great Britian signed at London on 
December 22, 1931, and made applicable to Trinidad and Tobago 
upon its entry into force on June 24, 1935, and which the 
United States and Trinidad and Tobago have continued to apply 
following Trinidad and Tobago independence. That treaty has 
become outmoded and the new Treaty will provide significant 
improvements. The Treaty can be implemented without new further 
legislation.
    Article 1 obligates each Contracting State to extradite to 
the other, pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, any person 
charged with or convicted of an extraditable offense.
    Article 2(1) defines an extraditable offense as one 
punishable under the laws of both Contracting States by 
deprivation of liberty for a period of more than one year, or 
by a more severe penalty. Use of such a ``dual criminality'' 
clause rather than a list of offenses covered by the Treaty 
obviates the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as 
additional offenses become punishable under the laws of both 
Contracting States.
    Article 2(2) defines an extraditable offense to include 
also an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, aiding or abetting, 
counselling, or procuring the commission of or being an 
accessory before or after the fact to an extraditable offense.
    Additional flexibility is provided by Article 2(3), which 
provides that an offense shall be considered an extraditable 
offense: whether or not the laws in the Contracting States 
place the offense within the same category of offenses or 
describe the offense by the same terminology; or whether or not 
the offense is one for which United States federal law requires 
the showing of such matters as interstate transportation or use 
of the mails or of other facilities affecting interstate or 
foreign commerce, such matters being merely for the purpose of 
establishing jurisdiction in a United States federal court.
    With regard to offenses committed outside the territory of 
the Requesting State, Article 2(4) provides the States with 
discretion to grant or deny extradition if the offense for 
which extradition is sought would not be punishable under the 
laws of the Requested State in similar circumstances. The 
United States recognizes the extraterritorial application of 
many of its criminal statutes and frequently makes requests for 
fugitives whose criminal activity occurred in foreign countries 
with the intent, actual or implied, of affecting the United 
States. Trinidad and Tobago did not indicate any anticipated 
difficulty with this provision.
    Article 2 contains two further provisions proposed by 
Trinidad and Tobago to facilitate judicial inquiry into the 
existence of dual criminality notwithstanding differences in 
the way national criminal laws describe or categories offenses. 
Article 2(3)(c) instructs the States, in determining whether an 
offense is extraditable, to evaluate the totality of the acts 
or omissions presented by the Requesting State, irrespective of 
differences in how both States' laws describe theconstituent 
elements of the offense. Article 2(6) contains a similarly helpful 
provision which rules out a refusal of extradition for revenue-related 
offenses on the ground that the Requested State's laws do not impose 
the same kind of tax or duty or do not contain a similar regulation to 
that of the Requesting State.
    Article 3 provides that extradition shall not be refused on 
the ground that the person sought is a national of the 
Requested State. Neither Party, in other words, may invoke 
nationality as a basis for denying an extradition.
    As is customary in extradition treaties, Article 4 
incorporates a political offense exception to the obligation to 
extradite. Article 4(1) states generally that extradition shall 
not be granted for an offense of a political character. Article 
4(2) specifies three categories of offenses that shall not be 
considered to be political offenses:
          (a) a murder or other willful crime against the 
        person of a Head of State of one of the Contracting 
        States, or of a member of the Head of State's family;
          (b) an offense for which both Contracting States are 
        obliged pursuant to a multilateral international 
        agreement to extradite the person sought or to submit 
        the case to their competent authorities for a decision 
        as to prosecution; and
          (c) a conspiracy or attempt to commit any of the 
        offenses described above, or aiding and abetting a 
        person who commits or attempts to commit such offenses.
The Treaty's political offense exception is substantially 
identical to that contained in several other modern extradition 
treaties, including the treaty with Jordan which recently 
received Senate advice and consent. Examples of offenses 
covered by Article 4(2)(b) include:
  --aircraft hijacking covered by The Hague Convention for the 
        Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at 
        The Hague December 16, 1970, and entered into force 
        October 14, 1971 (22 U.S.T. 1641; TIAS No. 7192); and,
  --aircraft sabotage covered by the Montreal Convention for 
        the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of 
        Civil Aviation, done at Montreal September 23, 1971, 
        and entered into force January 26, 1973, (24 U.S.T. 
        564; TIAS No. 7570).
    Article 4(3) provides that extradition shall not be granted 
if the executive authority of the Requested State determines 
that the request was politically motivated.
    Article 4(4) permits the executive authority of the 
Requested State to deny extradition for military offenses that 
are not offenses under ordinary criminal law (for example, 
desertion).
    Article 5 bars extradition when the person sought has been 
convicted or acquitted in the Requested State for the same 
offense, but does not bar extradition if the competent 
authorities in the Requested State have declined to prosecute 
or have decided to discontinue criminal proceedings against the 
person sought.
    Article 6 enables extradition requests to be granted 
irrespective of statutes of limitations in either the 
Requesting or Requested State.
    Article 7 establishes the procedures and describes the 
documents that are required to support an extradition request. 
The Article requires that all requests be submitted in writing 
through the diplomatic channel. Article 7(3)(c) provides that a 
request for the extradition of a person sought for prosecution 
be supported by evidence providing probable cause under the law 
of the Requested State for arrest and committal for trial if 
the offense had been committed in the Requested State. This is 
a lesser evidentiary standard than that contained in the 
current extradition treaty, and therefore should significantly 
improve the United States' ability to obtain extradition of 
fugitives from abroad.
    Article 8 establishes the procedures under which documents 
submitted pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty shall be 
received and admitted into evidence.
    Article 9 sets forth procedures for the provisional arrest 
and detention of a person sought pending presentation of the 
formal request forextradition. Article 9(4) provides that if 
the Requested State's executive authority has not received the request 
for extradition and supporting documentation within sixty days after 
the provisional arrest, the person may be discharged from custody. 
Article 9(5) provides explicitly that discharge from custody pursuant 
to Article 9(4) does not prejudice subsequent rearrest and extradition 
upon later delivery of the extradition request and supporting 
documents.
    Article 10 specifies the procedures governing surrender and 
return of persons sought. It requires the Requested State to 
provide prompt notice to the Requesting State through the 
diplomatic channel regarding its extradition decision. If the 
request is denied in whole or in part, Article 10(2) requires 
the Requested State to provide information regarding the 
reasons therefor. If extradition is granted, the person sought 
must be removed from the territory of the Requested State 
within the time prescribed by its law.
    Article 11 concerns temporary and deferred surrender. If a 
person whose extradition is sought is being prosecuted or is 
serving a sentence in the Requested State, that State may 
temporarily surrender the person to the Requesting State solely 
for the purpose of prosecution. Alternatively, the Requested 
State may postpone the extradition proceedings until its 
prosecution has been concluded and the sentence has been 
served.
    Article 12 sets forth a nonexclusive list of factors to be 
considered by the Requested State in determining to which State 
to surrender a person sought by more than one State.
    Article 13 provides for the seizure and surrender to the 
Requesting State of property connected with the offense for 
which extradition is granted, to the extent permitted under the 
law of the Requested State. Such property may be surrendered 
even when extradition cannot be effected due to the death, 
disappearance, or escape of the person sought. Surrender of 
property may be deferred if it is needed as evidence in the 
Requested State and may be conditioned upon satisfactory 
assurances that it will be returned. Article 13(3) imposes an 
obligation to respect the rights of third Parties in affected 
property.
    Article 14 sets forth the rule of speciality. It provides, 
subject to specific exceptions, that a person extradited under 
the Treaty may not be detained, tried, or punished in the 
Requesting State for an offense other than that for which 
extradition has been granted, unless a waiver of the rule is 
granted by the executive authority of the Requested State. 
Similarly, the Requesting State may not extradite such person 
to a third state for an offense committed prior to the original 
surrender unless the surrendering State consents. These 
restrictions do not apply if the extradited person leaves the 
Requesting State after extradition and voluntarily returns to 
it or fails to leave the Requesting State within thirty days of 
being free to do so.
    Article 15 permits surrender to the Requesting State 
without further proceedings if the person sought provides 
written consent thereto.
    Article 16 governs the transit through the territory of one 
Contracting State of a person being surrendered to the other 
State by a third State.
    Article 17 contains provisions on representation and 
expenses that are similar to those found in other modern 
extradition treaties. Specifically, the Requested State is 
required to represent the interests of the Requesting State in 
any proceedings arising out of a request for extradition. The 
United States and Trinidad and Tobago understand that the 
Requesting State will bear the costs in the event it must 
retain private counsel to pursue the extradition request. The 
Requesting State is required to bear the expenses related to 
the translation of documents and the transportation of the 
person surrendered. Article 17(3) clarifies that neither State 
shall make any pecuniary claim against the other State arising 
out of the arrest, detention, examination, or surrender of 
persons sought under the Treaty.
    Article 18 states that the United States Department of 
Justice and the Attorney General in Trinidad and Tobago may 
consult with each other directly or through the facilities of 
INTERPOL in connection with the processing of individual cases 
and in furtherance of maintaining and improving Treaty 
implementation procedures.
    Article 19, like the parallel provision in almost all 
recent United States extradition treaties, states that the 
Treaty shall apply to offenses committed before as well as 
after the date the Treaty enters into force.
    Ratification and entry into force are addressed in Article 
20. That Article provides that the States shall exchange 
diplomatic notes notifying one another of the completion of 
their respective requirements for entry into force, whereupon 
the Treaty shall enter into force. Upon the entry into force of 
this Treaty, the Extradition Treaty between the United States 
of America and Great Britain, signed at London December 22, 
1931, shall cease to have effect, with noted exceptions, 
between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago.
    Under Article 21, either Contracting State may terminate 
the Treaty at any time upon written notice to the other 
Contracting State, with termination to become effective six 
months after the date of receipt of such notice.
    A Technical Analysis explaining in detail the provisions of 
the Treaty is being prepared by the United States negotiating 
delegation and will be submitted separately to the Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations.
    The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in 
favoring approval of this Treaty by the Senate at an early 
date.
    Respectfully submitted,
                                                Madeleine Albright.




