[Senate Treaty Document 106-38]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Treaty Doc.
SENATE
2d Session 106-38
_______________________________________________________________________
EXTRADITION TREATY WITH BELIZE
__________
MESSAGE
from
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
transmitting
EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF BELIZE, SIGNED AT BELIZE ON MARCH 30,
2000
July 27, 2000.--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
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-118 WASHINGTON : 2000
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
----------
The White House, July 27, 2000.
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 Belize, signed at Belize on March 30,
2000.
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.
The Treaty is one of a series of modern extradition
treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to
counter criminal activities more effectively. Upon entry into
force, the Treaty will replace the outdated Extradition Treaty
between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland and the Government of the United States of
America, signed at London, June 8, 1972, entered into force on
October 21, 1976, and made applicable to Belize on January 21
1977. That treaty continued in force for Belize following
independence. This Treaty will, upon entry into force, enhance
cooperation between the law enforcement communities of the two
countries. It will thereby make a significant contribution to
international law enforcement efforts against serious offenses,
including terrorism, organized crime, and drug-trafficking
offenses.
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, July 5, 2000.
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 Belize, signed at Belize on
March 30, 2000. I recommend that the Treaty be transmitted to
the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification.
The Treaty follows generally the form and content of
extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States.
The Treaty will, upon entry into force, enhance cooperation
between the law enforcement communities of the United States
and Belize in areas of particular concern to the U.S. law
enforcement community. The Treaty will replace the Extradition
Treaty between the United States of America and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, signed at
London, June 8, 1972, entered into force October 21, 1976 and
made applicable to Belize on January 21, 1977. This treaty
continued in force for Belize following independence. The
current treaty has become outmoded and the new Treaty will
provide significant improvements. For example, it will
establish the coverage of such key offenses as operating a
continuing criminal enterprise, racketeering, money laundering
and firearms offenses. The new Treaty will not require any
implementing legislation.
Article 1 obligates the Parties to extradite to each other,
pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, persons sought for
prosecution or convicted of an extraditable offense by
Requesting State authorities.
Article 2 concerns extraditable offenses. Article 2(1)
defines an extraditable offense as one that falls within any of
the descriptions listed in the Schedule annexed to the Treaty,
or any other offense, provided that in either case the offense
is punishable under the laws in both States by deprivation of
liberty for a period of more than one year or by a more severe
penalty. The Schedule includes 40 of the most common
extraditable offenses. Use of a ``dual criminality'' clause in
addition to a list of offenses covered by the Treaty obviates
the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as additional
offenses become punishable under the law of both States.
Article 2(2) defines an extraditable offense further as
including an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, aiding or
abetting, counseling 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 an extraditable offense
whether or not (a) the laws in the two States place the offense
within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by
the same terminology; or (b) 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 that extradition
must be granted where the laws in the Requested State provide
for the punishment of an offense committed outside its
territory in similar circumstances.
Article 2(5) provides that if extradition is granted for an
extraditable offense, it shall also be granted for other
offenses specified in the request that do not meet the minimum
deprivation of liberty requirement, provided that all other
extradition requirements are met.
Article 3 provides that extradition shall not be refused on
the ground of the nationality of the person sought. Although
Belize as a common-law country has no domestic legal bar to
extraditing its nationals, until 5 years ago it refused to do
so. Article 3 would assure that Belize could not revert to this
prior practice.
As is customary in extradition treaties, Article 4
incorporates a political and military offense exception to the
obligation to extradite. Article 4(1) states generally that
extradition shall not be granted for political offenses.
Article 4(2) specifies three specific categories of offenses
that shall not be considered political offenses: (a) a murder
or other willful crime against a Head of State of one of the
States parties, or a member of such person's family; (b) an
offense for which both States have the obligation pursuant to a
multilateral international agreement to extradite the person
sought or to submit the case to their respective competent
authorities for decision as to prosecution (e.g., the
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizures of
Aircraft, done at the Hague on December 16, 1970, 22 UST 1641,
TIAS 7192); and (c) a conspiracy or attempt to commit any of
the foregoing offenses, or aiding or abetting a person who
commits or attempts to commit such offenses.
Article 4(3) further provides that notwithstanding the
three exceptions in Article 4(2), extradition shall not be
granted if the executive authority of the Requested State
determines that the request was politically motivated.
Article 4(4) provides that extradition may be denied for
offenses under military law 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 authorities in the
Requested State have either declined to prosecute or have
decided to discontinue criminal proceedings against the person
sought for the same offense for which extradition is requested.
Article 6 establishes the procedures and describes the
documents that are required to support a request for
extradition. It requires that all requests be submitted through
the diplomatic channel. Article 6(3) provides that, among other
things, a request for the extradition of a person sought for
prosecution must be supported by such evidence as would be
found sufficient, according to the law of the Requested State,
to justify committal for trial if the offense of which the
person has been accused had been committed in the Requested
State.
Article 7 establishes the procedures under which documents
submitted pursuant to Article 6 shall be received and admitted
into evidence in each State when it is the Requested State.
These provisions are similar to those found in other modern
extradition treaties.
Article 8 provides that extradition shall not be denied
because of the prescriptive laws (e.g., statute of limitations)
of either State.
Article 9 sets forth procedures for the provisional arrest
and detention of the person sought in cases of urgency, pending
presentation of the formal request for extradition. Article
9(4) provides that, if the Requested State's executive
authority has not received the formal request for extradition
and the supporting documents required by Article 6 within sixty
days from the date of provisional arrest, the person may be
discharged from custody. During that time the person arrested
must have access to the courts for such remedies and recourses
available under the Requested State's laws. Article 9(5)
explicitly provides that the release of a person from custody
pursuant to Article 9(4) does not prejudice subsequent re-
arrest and extradition if the extradition request and
supporting documents are delivered at a later date.
Article 10 specifies the standard procedures governing the
extradition decision and the surrender and return of persons
sought. Article 10(1) provides that extradition shall be
granted only if the evidence is sufficient under the law of the
Requested State either to justify the committal for trial of
the person sought if the offense had been committed in the
Requested State or to prove that the person is the identical
person convicted by the Requesting State. Article 10 further
requires the Requested State to provide prompt notice through
the diplomatic channel to the Requesting State of its decision
on the request for extradition and to provide reasons for any
complete or partial denial of a request. If extradition is
granted, the relevant authorities of the States must agree on
the date and place for the surrender of the person sought.
Article 10(5) provides that if the person sought is not removed
from the territory of the Requested State within the time
period prescribed by the law of that State, the person may be
discharged from custody; the Requested State, in its
discretion, may subsequently refuse extradition for the same
offense.
Article 11 concerns temporary and deferred surrender. If a
person whose extradition has been granted is being proceeded
against or is serving a sentence in the Requested State, the
Requested State may temporarily surrender the person to the
Requesting State for prosecution. The person so surrendered
must be kept in custody in the Requesting State and returned to
the Requested State after the conclusion of the proceedings
against that person, on conditions agreed between the States.
Alternatively, the Requested State may postpone the extradition
proceedings until its prosecution has been concluded or the
sentence has been served.
Article 12 again reflects the U.S. practice in modern
extradition treaties, setting forth a non-exclusive 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 that if extradition is granted, the
Requested State may, to the extent permitted under its law,
seize and surrender to the Requesting State all articles,
documents, and evidence connected with the offense. Such items
may be surrendered even if the extradition cannot be carried
out due to the death, disappearance, or escape of the person
sought. Surrender of the property may be conditioned upon
satisfactory assurances concerning its return, or may be
deferred if the property is needed as evidence in the Requested
State. Article 13(3) provides that any rights of third parties
in such property must be duly respected.
Article 14 sets forth the rule of specialty. 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 or a differently denominated
offense based on the same facts on which extradition was
granted (provided such offense is extraditable or is a lesser
included offense). Exceptions to the rule of specialty include
an offense committed after the extradition of the person or an
offense for which a waiver of the rule of specialty is granted
by the executive authority of the Requested State. Similarly,
the Requesting State may not extradite the 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 person has left and voluntarily returned to
the territory of the Requesting State or if the person has had
an opportunity to leave the territory of the Requesting State
after extradition and has not done so within ten days.
Article 15 permits surrender by the Requested State without
further proceedings if the person sought consents to be
surrendered.
Article 16 governs the transit through the territory of one
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 must
bear the expenses incurred and represent the interests of the
Requesting State in any proceedings arising out of a request
for extradition. The Requesting State must pay all expenses
incurred in translation of extradition documents and the
transportation of the person surrendered.
Article 17(3) clarifies that neither State can 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 provides that the Department of Justice of the
United States and the Attorney General of Belize may consult
with each other directly in connection with the processing of
individual cases and in furtherance of maintaining and
improving procedures for the implementation of the Treaty.
Article 19, like similar provisions in most recent U.S.
extradition treaties, states that the Treaty is applicable to
offenses committed before as well as after the date the Treaty
enters into force, provided that extradition shall not be
granted for an offense committed before the Treaty enters into
force which was not an offense under the laws of both States at
the time of its commission. The Article also provides that
nothing in the Treaty can be construed to criminalize any
conduct not subject to criminal sanctions at the time it
occurred.
Article 20 contains final clauses dealing with the Treaty's
ratification and entry into force. It provides that the Treaty
is subject to ratification and that the Treaty shall enter into
force upon the exchange of instruments of ratification, which
is to take place as soon as possible. Article 20(3) provides
that, upon entry into force of this Treaty, the Extradition
Treaty between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the United
States of America, signed at London June 8, 1972, shall cease
to have any effect between the United States and Belize.
Nevertheless, the Article notes that the Treaty shall continue
to apply to any extradition proceedings in which extradition
documents have already been submitted to thecourts of the
Requested State at the time the Treaty enters into force, except that
Article 14, addressing the rule of specialty, and Article 15, providing
for voluntary surrender, shall apply to persons found extraditable
under the prior treaty.
Article 21 provides that either State may terminate the
Treaty by giving six months written notice to the other State.
A Technical Analysis explaining in detail the provisions of
the Treaty is being prepared by the United States negotiating
delegation, consisting of representatives from the Departments
of Justice and State, and will be transmitted 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.