[Senate Treaty Document 106-4]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



106th Congress                                              Treaty Doc.
                                 SENATE                     
 1st Session                                                     106-4
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     



 
                   EXTRADITION TREATY WITH PARAGUAY

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
  AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF PARAGUAY, SIGNED AT 
  WASHINGTON ON NOVEMBER 9, 1998




 July 13, 1999.--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
69-118                     WASHINGTON : 1999

                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                    The White House, July 13, 1999.
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 the Republic of Paraguay, signed at 
Washington on November 9, 1998.
    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 states, 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.
    Upon entry into force, this Treaty would enhance 
cooperation between the law enforcement authorities of both 
countries, and thereby make a significant contribution to 
international law enforcement efforts. The Treaty would 
supersede the Extradition Treaty between the United States of 
America and the Republic of Paraguay signed at Asuncion on May 
24, 1973.
    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 24, 1999.
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 the Republic of Paraguay (the 
``Treaty''), signed at Washington on November 9, 1998. 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. 
It represents part of a concerted effort by the Department of 
State and the Department of Justice to develop modern 
extradition relationships to enhance the ability of the United 
States to prosecute serious offenders, including, especially, 
narcotics traffickers and terrorists.
    The Treaty marks a significant step in bilateral 
cooperation between the United States and Paraguay. Upon entry 
into force, it would supersede the extradition treaty currently 
in force between the two countries, signed at Asuncion on May 
24, 1973. The current treaty has become outmoded, and the new 
treaty will provide significant improvements. The new treaty 
can be implemented without new legislation.
    Article I obligates each Party to extradite to the other, 
pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, any person sought in 
the Requesting State for trial or punishment for an 
extraditable offense.
    Article II(1) defines an extraditable offense as one 
punishable under the laws in both Parties by deprivation of 
liberty for a maximum 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 Parties.
    Article II(3) defines an extraditable offense to include 
also an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, or the participation 
in the commission of, an extraditable offense.
    Additional flexibility is provided by Article II(4), which 
provides that an offense shall be considered an extraditable 
offense whether or not the laws of the Parties place the 
offense within the same category of offenses or describe the 
offense bythe same terminology; and whether or not the offense 
is one for which the Requesting State's 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 the 
appropriate court.
    With regard to an offense committed outside the territory 
of the Requesting State, Article II(5) provides that such an 
offense shall be an extraditable offense if it has effects in 
the territory of the Requesting State, or if the laws in the 
Requested State provide for punishment of an offense committed 
outside its territory in similar circumstances.
    Article III 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 IV 
incorporates a political offense exception to the obligation to 
extradite. Article IV(1) states generally that extradition 
shall not be granted for a political offense. The article 
expressly excludes from the reach of the political offense 
exception several categories of offenses:
          (a) a murder or other willful crime against the 
        physical integrity of the Head of State of one of the 
        Parties, or of a member of the Head of State's family;
          (b) an offense for which both Parties are obliged 
        pursuant to a multilateral international agreement to 
        extradite the person sought or submit the case to their 
        competent authorities for decision as to prosecution; 
        and
          (c) a conspiracy or attempt to commit the offenses 
        described above, or participation in the commission of 
        such offenses.
    Article IV(2) provides that extradition shall not be 
granted if the competent authority of the Requested State 
determines that the request was politically motivated.
    Article IV(3) provides that the Requested State may refuse 
extradition for offenses under military law that are not 
offenses under ordinary criminal law (for example, desertion).
    Article V bars extradition when the person sought has been 
convicted or acquitted in the Requested State for the same 
offense, but does notbar extradition if the competent 
authorities in the Requested State have declined to prosecute for the 
acts for which extradition has been requested. In addition, extradition 
shall not be precluded by the fact that the authorities in the 
Requested State, after initiating criminal proceedings, have decided to 
discontinue them, so long as the Requested State's laws regarding 
double jeopardy would permit the future reinstitution of such criminal 
proceedings.
    Under Article VI(1), when an offense is punishable by death 
in the Requesting State, but not in the Requested State, the 
latter may refuse extradition unless the Requesting State 
provides assurances that the death penalty will not be imposed 
or, if imposed, will not be carried out. In cases where the 
Requesting State has provided such assurances, Article VI(2) 
states that the death penalty, if imposed by the courts of the 
Requesting State, will not be carried out.
    Articles VII-IX address matters related to the presentation 
and processing of extradition requests. Article VII describes 
the documents that are required to support a request for 
extradition. Article VIII provides that all documents submitted 
by the Requesting State shall be translated into the language 
of the Requested State. Article IX states the criteria under 
which documents submitted pursuant to Article VII shall be 
received and admitted into evidence in the Requested State.
    Article X sets forth procedures for the provisional arrest 
and detention of a person sought, in case of urgency, pending 
presentation of the formal request for extradition. Article 
X(4) provides that if the Requested State's diplomatic 
authority has not received the request for extradition and 
supporting documentation within sixty (60) days after the 
provisional arrest, the person may be discharged from custody. 
Article X(5) provides explicitly that discharge from custody 
pursuant to Article X(4) shall not prevent subsequent re-arrest 
and extradition upon later delivery of the extradition request 
and supporting documents.
    Article XI specifies the procedures governing the surrender 
and return of persons sought. The Requested State is required 
to notify promptly the Requesting State of its decision on 
extradition and, if the request is denied in whole or in part, 
to provide an explanation of the reasons for the denial of the 
request. If the request is granted, the Parties shall agree on 
the time and place for the surrender of the person sought. Such 
person must be removed from the territory of the Requested 
State within two months from the date of the judicial 
extradition order. Otherwise, that person may be discharged 
from custody, and the Requested State mayrefuse a subsequent 
extradition request from the Requesting State for that person for the 
same offense.
    Article XII 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 the 
domestic prosecution has been concluded and any sentence 
imposed has been served.
    Article XIII sets 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 XIV 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 XIV(3) imposes an 
obligation to respect the rights of third Parties in affected 
property.
    Article XV sets forth the rule of speciality. It provides 
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 lesser 
included or differently denominated offense based on the same 
facts on which extradition has been granted. However, the 
article sets forth a number of exceptions, including the 
consent of the competent 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 extradited person leaves the 
Requesting State after extradition and voluntarily returns to 
it or fails to leave the Requesting State within thirty (30) 
days of being free to do so.
    Article XVI permits surrender to the Requesting State 
without further proceedings if the person sought directly and 
expressly consents.
    Article XVII governs the transit through the territory of 
one Party of a person being surrendered to the other Party by a 
third State.
    Article XVIII contains provisions on representation and 
expenses. Specifically, theRequested State is obligated, to the 
fullest extent permitted by its law, to represent the Requesting State 
in any proceedings arising out of a request for extradition. The 
Requesting State shall bear the expenses related to the translation of 
documents and the transportation of the person surrendered. Article 
XVIII(3) provides that neither Party shall make any pecuniary claim 
against the other Party related to the arrest, detention, custody, 
examination, or surrender of persons sought under the Treaty.
    Article XIX provides that, for the United States of 
America, the term ``competent authority,'' as used in the 
Treaty, means the appropriate executive authorities.
    Article XX states that the Parties may consult with each 
other in connection with the processing of cases and in 
furtherance of maintaining and improving procedures for the 
implementation of the Treaty.
    Article XXI, 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. The conduct in 
question must have been an offense under the laws of both 
Parties when it occurred.
    Article XXII contains final clauses dealing with the 
Treaty's ratification and entry into force. Paragraph 1 states 
that the Treaty shall be subject to ratification, and the 
instruments of ratification shall be exchanged at Asuncion as 
soon as possible. Paragraph 2 states the Treaty shall enter 
into force upon the exchange of instruments of ratification. 
Paragraph 3 provides that, upon entry into force of this 
Treaty, the Treaty on Extradition between the United States of 
America and the Republic of Paraguay, signed at Asuncion on May 
24, 1973, shall cease to have any effect, with certain 
specified exceptions.
    Article XXIII provides that either Party may terminate the 
Treaty at any time by giving written notice to the other Party, 
and the termination shall be effective six months after the 
date 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 the earliest 
possible date.
    Respectfully submitted,
                                                Madeleine Albright.


