[Senate Treaty Document 114-11]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]






114th Congress      }                              {        Treaty Doc.
                                  SENATE 
 2d Session         }                              {             114-11                
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

 
 TREATY WITH KAZAKHSTAN ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                     THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

    TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE REPUBLIC OF 
 KAZAKHSTAN ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS, SIGNED AT 
                    WASHINGTON ON FEBRUARY 20, 2015

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


March 17, 2016.--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 PUBLISHING OFFICE 

59-118                         WASHINGTON : 2016             
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                   The White House, March 17, 2016.
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 Treaty between 
the United States of America and the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, signed at 
Washington on February 20, 2015. I also transmit, for the 
information of the Senate, the report of the Department of 
State with respect to the Treaty.
    The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal 
assistance treaties negotiated by the United States to more 
effectively counter criminal activities. The Treaty should 
enhance our ability to investigate and prosecute a wide variety 
of crimes.
    The Treaty provides for a broad range of cooperation in 
criminal matters. Under the Treaty, the Parties agree to assist 
each other by, among other things: producing evidence (such as 
testimony, documents, or items) obtained voluntarily or, where 
necessary, by compulsion; arranging for persons, including 
persons in custody, to travel to another country to provide 
evidence; serving documents; executing searches and seizures; 
locating and identifying persons or items; and freezing and 
forfeiting assets or property that may be the proceeds or 
instrumentalities of crime.
    I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable 
consideration to the Treaty, and give its advice and consent to 
ratification.

                                                      Barack Obama.
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                                                      
                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                       Department of State,
                                       Washington, October 7, 2015.
The President,
The White House.
    The President: I have the honor to submit to you the Treaty 
between the United States of America and the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, 
signed at Washington on February 20, 2015 (the ``Treaty''). I 
recommend the Treaty be transmitted to the Senate for its 
advice and consent to ratification.
    The Treaty covers mutual legal assistance in criminal 
matters. In recent years, the United States has entered into 
similar bilateral treaties with a number of countries. The 
Treaty contains all of the essential provisions of such 
treaties sought by the United States. It will enhance our 
ability to investigate and prosecute a wide variety of 
offenses. The Treaty is self-executing and will not require 
further implementing legislation.
    An overview of the Treaty, including a detailed, article-
by-article analysis, is enclosed with this report. The 
Department of Justice joins the Department of State in favoring 
approval of the Treaty by the Senate at the earliest possible 
date.
    Respectfully submitted.
                                                     John F. Kerry.
    Enclosures: As stated.

             U.S.-Kazakhstan Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty


                                overview


    The Treaty between the United States of America and the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal 
Matters (the ``Treaty'') creates, for the first time, a treaty-
based relationship of mutual legal assistance between the 
United States and the Republic of Kazakhstan. The Treaty covers 
mutual legal assistance in criminal matters and contains many 
provisions similar to those in treaties of its kind with other 
nations. It also includes all of the essential provisions 
sought by the United States.


                      article-by-article analysis


    The following is an article-by-article description of the 
provisions of the Treaty.
    Article 1 sets out the scope of assistance available under 
the Treaty. Article 1(1) creates an international obligation on 
each Party to provide mutual legal assistance to the other 
Party in connection with the investigation, prosecution and 
prevention of criminal offenses and in proceedings related to 
criminal matters, such as civil forfeiture proceedings. This 
ensures that the Parties can afford each other legal assistance 
in a broad range of criminal matters, from violent crimes to 
fraud, from tax matters to racketeering, from computer crime to 
environmental crime, and so on. Pursuant to Article 1(2), 
assistance also may be sought for investigations and 
proceedings by authorities involved in implementing 
governmental regulations relating to violations that may be 
referred for criminal prosecution under the laws of the 
Requesting State. Thus, where the conditions of the Treaty are 
otherwise met, assistance would be available, for example, for 
proceedings of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission when 
those proceedings are incidental to, or connected with pending 
criminal investigations or prosecutions, or may be referred for 
criminal prosecution. Article 1(3) contains a non-exhaustive 
list of the major types of assistance to be provided under the 
Treaty, including producing evidence (such as testimony, 
documents, or items) obtained voluntarily or, where necessary, 
by compulsion; arranging for persons, including persons in 
custody, to travel to another country to provide evidence; 
serving documents; conducting searches and seizures; locating 
or identifying persons or items; and identifying, tracing, 
immobilizing, seizing and forfeiting assets or property that 
may be the proceeds or instrumentalities of crime. Each of 
these types of assistance is described in detail in subsequent 
articles in the Treaty.
    The Treaty also authorizes provision of any other 
assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Party receiving 
the request (referred to in the Treaty as the ``Requested 
State,'' while the Party making the request is the ``Requesting 
State''). As long as there is no specific legal restriction 
under the laws of the Requested State barring the type of 
assistance requested, it may be provided pursuant to the 
Treaty.
    Consistent with most U.S. mutual legal assistance treaties 
(MLATs), Article 1(4) provides that, with the exception of 
where it is specifically required by the laws of the Requested 
State, ``dual criminality'' is not a prerequisite for 
assistance under the Treaty. Thus, unless otherwise provided by 
the laws of the Requested State, assistance shall be provided 
without regard to whether the conduct at issue would constitute 
an offense under the laws of the Requested State. The Treaty 
does require ``dual criminality'' in certain circumstances. For 
example, under Article 14, a Requested State is obligated to 
execute a search and seizure request only if the request 
includes sufficient information justifying the action under its 
law and the offense at issue would also constitute an offense 
under its law.
    Article 1(5), a standard provision in U.S. MLATs, provides 
that the Treaty is intended solely for government-to-government 
mutual legal assistance. The Treaty is not intended to provide 
to persons other than the Parties a means of evidence 
gathering, nor is it intended to extend generally to civil 
matters. Private persons in the United States may continue to 
obtain evidence from Kazakhstan by letters rogatory, an avenue 
of international assistance that the Treaty leaves undisturbed. 
Similarly, the paragraph provides that the Treaty does not give 
rise to any right in any private person to suppress or exclude 
evidence provided pursuant to the Treaty, or to impede the 
execution of a request.
    Article 2 requires each Party to designate a ``Central 
Authority'' to make and receive Treaty requests. The Central 
Authority of the United States would make requests to 
Kazakhstan on behalf of federal and state agencies and local 
law enforcement authorities in the United States. The Central 
Authority of Kazakhstan would make all requests emanating from 
analogous officials in Kazakhstan. Pursuant to Article 2(3), 
the Central Authorities are to communicate directly with one 
another.
    For the United States, the Central Authority is the 
Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney 
General. For Kazakhstan, the Central Authority is the 
Prosecutor General's Office. In the United States, the 
authority to handle duties of the Central Authority under MLATs 
has been delegated to the Office of International Affairs in 
the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.
    The Central Authority of the Requesting State exercises 
discretion, consistent with the provisions of the Treaty, as to 
the form of requests, as well as the number and priority of 
requests. The Central Authority of the Requested State is 
responsible for receiving and evaluating each incoming request; 
transmitting it to the proper agency, court, or other authority 
for execution; and providing a timely response.
    Article 3 sets forth the circumstances under which the 
Requested State's Central Authority may deny assistance under 
the Treaty. Refusal under this Article is discretionary with 
the Central Authority of the Requested State. Several of the 
grounds for refusal are common to most U.S. MLATs. For example, 
a request may be denied if it relates to a military offense or 
does not conform to the requirements of the Treaty. A request 
may also be denied if its execution would prejudice the 
sovereignty, security, public order or other essential 
interests of the Requested State. This essential interests 
clause would allow the United States to deny requests for 
assistance in support of investigations or prosecutions that 
are politically motivated, infringe on freedom of expression or 
other U.S. constitutional protections, or are connected to a 
political offense. The Parties discussed the scope of the 
essential interests clause during negotiations and agreed that 
it would permit denial on these grounds.
    In keeping with the overall intent of the Treaty to 
facilitate assistance, the Parties also included in Article 3 a 
provision designed to limit the use of grounds for refusal. 
Under Article 3(2), a Central Authority, before denying 
assistance under Article 3(1), is to consult with its 
counterpart in the Requesting State to consider whether 
assistance can be provided subject to such conditions as the 
Central Authority of the Requested State deems necessary. If 
the Requesting State accepts assistance subject to these 
conditions, it is required to comply with them.
    Article 3(3) gives the Requested State discretion to deny a 
request if the offense is punishable by less than one year of 
imprisonment under the law of the Requesting State or the crime 
is financial in nature but does not involve a significant 
material loss, and the Central Authority of the Requested State 
determines that the resources required to execute the request 
are not justified in light of the less severe nature of the 
offense. The inclusion of such a de minimis clause is a 
priority for the United States in order to avoid the obligation 
to execute large numbers of MLAT requests relating to minor 
crimes, which can create significant burdens on the resources 
of the Department of Justice.
    In addition, if the Central Authority of the Requested 
State denies assistance, it is required under Article 3(4) to 
inform the Central Authority of the Requesting State of the 
reasons for the denial.
    Article 4 prescribes the form and contents of requests 
under the Treaty, specifying in detail the information required 
in each request. It also permits the Central Authority of the 
Requested State to request additional information, if necessary 
to execute the request.
    Article 5 concerns the execution of requests. Article 5(1) 
includes three important concepts: the obligation of the 
Central Authority of the Requested State to execute requests 
promptly (or to transmit them to the competent authorities who 
have jurisdiction to execute the requests); the requirement 
that competent authorities do ``everything in their power'' to 
execute requests; and the granting of authority to courts of 
the Requested State to issue subpoenas, search warrants, or 
other legal process necessary to execute requests. Article 5(2) 
builds on these concepts by requiring the Requested State to 
make all necessary arrangements to represent the Requesting 
State in any proceedings arising out of a request for 
assistance. It is understood that such proceeding may include 
proceedings before a judicial authority or administrative 
agency. Taken together, these provisions reflect an 
understanding that the Parties intend to provide each other 
with a wide measure of assistance from judicial and executive 
branches of government in the execution of mutual legal 
assistance requests. These provisions also specifically 
authorize U.S. courts to use all of their powers to issue 
whatever process is necessary to satisfy a request under the 
Treaty, whether the authority for such process comes from the 
Treaty itself or from existing statutes.
    Article 5(3) specifies that requests are to be executed in 
accordance with the laws of the Requested State except to the 
extent that the Treaty provides otherwise. The requests 
themselves may specify a particular procedure to be followed, 
and such specified procedure is to be followed unless 
prohibited by the law of the Requested State. Following the 
procedure specified can be important to ensure evidence 
collected in one State satisfies the requirements for 
admissibility at trial in the other. It is understood that, if 
neither the Treaty nor the request specifies procedures to be 
followed, the Requested State is to execute the request in 
accordance with its domestic laws applicable in criminal 
investigations and related proceedings. The intent of this 
provision, like similar provisions in other U.S. MLATs, is to 
allow the Requested State to use its established procedures for 
obtaining evidence where procedures are not otherwise 
specified, so long as those procedures do not undermine the 
obligation in the Treaty to provide assistance. See, e.g., In 
re Commissioner's Subpoenas, 325 F.3d 1287 (11th Cir. 2003).
    Article 5(4) allows the Central Authority of the Requested 
State to postpone the execution of a request, or make execution 
subject to specified conditions, if it determines that 
execution of the request would interfere with an ongoing 
criminal investigation, prosecution or proceeding in that 
state. If the Requesting State accepts assistance subject to 
conditions, it must comply with such conditions.
    Confidentiality of requests is addressed in Article 5(5). 
The Requesting State may ask that the request, its contents and 
the outcome of the execution of the request be kept 
confidential. The Requested State must use its best efforts to 
comply with such a request, but if assistance cannot be granted 
without breaching the confidentiality requirements, the 
decision whether to proceed is left to the Requesting State.
    Articles 5(6) and (7) address some of the types of 
communications between Central Authorities essential to a good 
working mutual legal assistance relationship. For example, 
Central Authorities must respond to reasonable requests for 
progress reports, and inform each other of the outcome of 
execution of requests, including any reasons for denial of a 
request. Article 5(8) makes clear that the Requested State is 
not obligated to translate documents provided to the Requesting 
State in response to a request.
    Article 6 addresses the costs associated with providing 
assistance. As is standard in U.S. MLATs, Article 6 provides 
that the Requested State must pay all costs relating to the 
execution of the request, including representation costs, 
except for the following items to be paid by the Requesting 
State: fees of expert witnesses; costs of translation, 
interpretation and transcription; and allowances and expenses 
related to travel of persons pursuant to Articles 10 and 11 
(relating to travel for the purpose of providing assistance and 
transfer of persons in custody). The Kazakh delegation 
explained that, for its domestic law purposes, its treasury 
department would require that the treaty contain an explicit 
obligation that it pay the costs of executing requests; 
accordingly, this Article specifies that the State obligated to 
pay for a particular expense (as provided elsewhere in this 
Article) shall follow its own internal processes for making the 
payment. This article also provides that, in the event that 
fulfilling a request would require extraordinary expenses, the 
Central Authorities will consult in order to determine how 
those costs shall be borne.
    Article 7 addresses limitations on use of information and 
evidence provided under the Treaty. Under Article 7(1), the 
Central Authority of the Requested State may request that 
information or evidence produced in response to a request under 
the Treaty not be used for any investigation, prosecution or 
proceeding other than that described in the request without the 
consent of the Central Authority of the Requested State. In 
such cases, the Requesting State must comply with the request 
for limitations on use.
    Under Article 7(2), the Central Authority of the Requested 
State may also request that information or evidence produced 
under the Treaty be kept confidential or be used subject to 
specified terms and conditions. If the Requesting State accepts 
the requested conditions, it must use its best efforts to 
comply with those conditions. The default rule, however, is 
that such information or evidence is not confidential, and 
Article 7(4) also provides that, once such information or 
evidence has been made public in the territory of the 
Requesting State in accordance with Article 7, it may be used 
for any purpose. Moreover, the Treaty explicitly permits the 
disclosure of information or evidence to the extent that there 
is an obligation to disclose under the Constitution of the 
Requesting State in a criminal proceeding. This contingency, 
found in Article 7(3), was included to ensure that the United 
States would be able to satisfy any obligations to disclose 
information under the Constitution, such as those set forth in 
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
    As with other provisions of the Treaty, the confidentiality 
protections and use limitation provisions of Article 7 are for 
the benefit of the two governments that are Parties to the 
Treaty, and invocation and enforcement of these provisions is 
entirely a matter for the Parties.
    Article 8 is the first in a series of articles that spell 
out in detail the procedures to be employed in the case of 
specific types of requests for assistance outlined in Article 
1(3). Article 8 addresses production of evidence, whether it is 
a statement or testimony, documents, records, or particular 
items. A person from whom evidence is sought under the Treaty 
may appear voluntarily to provide such evidence, or, if 
necessary, the Treaty authorizes the Parties to compel 
production of evidence. This compulsion may be accomplished by 
subpoena or any other means available under the laws of the 
Requested State (see Article 5(3)).
    Article 8(2) calls on the Requested State, upon request, to 
inform the Requesting State in advance of the date and place of 
the taking of testimony or evidence. Article 8(3) requires the 
Requested State to permit persons specified in the request to 
be present during execution of the request and to allow such 
persons to question the person giving testimony or evidence.
    Article 8(4) provides that, if a person from whom the 
request seeks testimony or evidence asserts a right to decline 
to provide such evidence by claiming an immunity, incapacity or 
privilege under the laws of the Requesting State, the evidence 
shall nonetheless be taken and the claim made known to 
authorities of the Requesting State so that they may resolve 
it. The Treaty does not specifically address the resolution of 
claims of privilege under the Requested State's law but, by 
implication, those are to be resolved by that State's 
authorities. This formulation allows each Party to resolve 
claims of privilege made under its own laws.
    Article 8(5) contains the first of several provisions in 
the Treaty addressing the authentication of evidence produced 
pursuant to the Treaty. Similar provisions are found at 
Articles 9(3) and 14(2). Evidence produced under the Treaty may 
be authenticated by an attestation, including, with respect to 
business records, official records, and items that have been 
seized pursuant to the Treaty, by use of one of the forms 
appended to the Treaty. The appended forms are an integral part 
of the Treaty. The Treaty provides that evidence produced and 
authenticated according to the procedure set forth in the 
Treaty shall be admissible in evidence in the territory of the 
Requesting State.
    Article 9 addresses the provision of documents or other 
records in the possession of government agencies. The Parties 
are obligated to provide to each other copies of publicly 
available records in any form in the possession of governmental 
departments and agencies upon request. The Treaty authorizes 
the Requested State, in its discretion, to provide to the 
Requesting State any records that are not publicly available, 
to the same extent, and under the same conditions, as they 
would be available to the Requested State's own law enforcement 
or judicial authorities.
    The Treaty will constitute a ``convention relating to the 
exchange of tax information'' for purposes of Title 26, United 
States Code, Section 6103(k)(4), and the United States would 
have the discretion to provide tax return information to 
Kazakhstan under this article in appropriate cases.
    Article 10 provides a mechanism for the Requesting State to 
ask for the voluntary appearance in its territory, or in the 
territory of a third state, of a person located in the 
territory of the Requested State for the purpose of assistance 
under the Treaty, such as to serve as a witness or expert in 
proceedings or to assist in an investigation. The Requesting 
State must indicate the extent to which the person's expenses 
will be paid. The Requested State is required to inform the 
person of the request for the person's appearance and notify 
the Requesting State of the person's response.
    When a person agrees to travel to appear in the territory 
of the Requesting State, Article 10(2) provides that the 
Requesting State shall grant the person safe conduct, thus 
ensuring that the person appearing in the territory of the 
Requesting State will not be subject to service of process or 
be detained or subjected to any restriction on personal liberty 
for acts or convictions that preceded the person's departure 
from the territory of the Requested State. The grant of safe 
conduct pursuant to this provision applies only to past 
offenses and would not prevent the Requesting State from 
prosecuting the person for perjury or any other crime committed 
while present, pursuant to Article 10, in the territory of the 
Requesting State. Under Article 10(3), safe conduct shall cease 
seven days after the person is notified that his presence in 
the Requesting State is no longer required and he is physically 
able to depart but has not done so, or when the person has left 
the territory of the Requesting State and voluntarily returns. 
In its discretion, the Central Authority of the Requesting 
State may, for good cause, extend the period of safe conduct.
    Article 11 provides a similar mechanism for persons in 
custody. A need sometimes arises for the testimony in one 
country of a person who is incarcerated in another country. For 
example, a person incarcerated in one country--whether the 
Requesting or Requested State--may need to be present for the 
purpose of assistance under the Treaty, such as when an 
incarcerated witness may have to give testimony in the presence 
of an incarcerated defendant in the other country. The 
appearance of the detained person is still voluntary, but is 
also subject to the agreement of the Central Authorities. In 
addition, the Treaty imposes certain conditions on such 
transfers: the person must be held in custody by the receiving 
State, unless otherwise authorized by the sending State; the 
receiving State must return the person in custody to the 
territory of the sending State as soon as circumstances permit 
or as otherwise agreed; the return of the person shall not 
require extradition proceedings; and the period that the person 
is in custody in the territory of the receiving State shall be 
credited against the person's sentence in the sending State.
    Article 12 provides for determining the whereabouts or 
identity in the territory of the Requesting State of persons 
(such as witnesses, potential defendants, or experts) or items 
when such information is requested. The Treaty requires only 
that the Requested State use its best efforts to ascertain the 
location or identity of the person or items sought. The extent 
of such efforts will vary, of course, depending on the quality 
and extent of the information provided by the Requesting State 
concerning the suspected or last known location of the person 
or items.
    Article 13 relates to service of documents. It creates an 
obligation on the part of the Requested State to use its best 
efforts to serve documents relating to a request for 
assistance, such as summonses, complaints, subpoenas, or 
notices. Under Article 13(2), when the document pertains to an 
appearance in the territory of the Requesting State, the 
request for the service of the document must be transmitted a 
reasonable time before the scheduled appearance. Article 13(3) 
requires the Requested State to return proof of service in the 
manner specified in the request.
    Article 14 obligates the Requested State to execute a 
request for the search, seizure, and delivery of any item to 
the Requesting State if the request includes the information 
justifying such action under the laws of the Requested State 
and the offense at issue would also constitute an offense under 
the law of the Requested State. For requests from Kazakhstan to 
the United States, this means the request would have to be 
supported by a showing of probable cause for the search. The 
Requested State may require that the Requesting State agree to 
terms deemed necessary to protect interests of third parties, 
such as victims and legitimate owners.
    Article 15 allows the Requested State to require that the 
Requesting State return any items provided to it in execution 
of a request under the Treaty.
    Assistance in forfeiture proceedings is the subject of 
Article 16. The types of actions that could be undertaken under 
this Article include actions to restrain, seize and forfeit 
property. The Article applies both to conviction-based 
forfeiture proceedings and to non-conviction based forfeiture 
proceedings premised on criminal conduct. The Requested State 
is required to provide the assistance only if the request 
includes information sufficient under the laws of the Requested 
State to justify the action. Article 16(2) provides a non-
exhaustive list of the types of assistance that a Party is 
required to provide pursuant to this Article.
    Article 16(3) requires the Requested State to consult with 
the Requesting State before disposing of property frozen, 
restrained, seized, or forfeited pursuant to Article 16. 
Article 16(4) permits the Party in control of the property to 
transfer all or part of it to the other Party or, after 
consultation between the Parties, to any other state that 
assisted in forfeiture of property in a manner proportionate to 
the other Party's or other state's assistance. United States 
law permits the government to transfer a share of certain 
forfeited property to other countries that participate directly 
or indirectly in the seizure or forfeiture of the property 
when, among other requirements, such transfer is authorized by 
an international agreement. This Article provides such 
authorization for asset sharing with Kazakhstan. Article 16(4) 
also provides that, where appropriate and upon request, 
priority must be given to returning property to the Requesting 
State so that victims of an offense may be compensated or the 
property may be returned to its legitimate owners. Article 
16(5) requires the Parties to assist each other, to the extent 
permitted by their respective domestic laws, in proceedings 
relating to restitution to victims of crime. Article 16(6) 
gives the Requested State discretion to deny assistance 
requested pursuant to Article 16 if the value of the property 
in question does not substantially exceed the resources that 
would be expended in providing the assistance. Before denying 
assistance for this reason, however, the Central Authority of 
the Requested State must consult with the Central Authority of 
the Requesting State.
    Article 17 states that this Treaty is not intended to be 
the sole mechanism for the Parties to provide assistance to 
each other and the Parties may provide assistance to each other 
though other means, such as applicable agreements, the 
provisions of their national laws, and other arrangements or 
practices. Thus, for example, the Treaty would leave the 
provisions of U.S. and Kazakh law on letters rogatory 
completely undisturbed, and would not alter any practices or 
arrangements concerning investigative assistance or prohibit 
the Parties from developing other such practices or 
arrangements. Further, the article provides that a request for 
assistance is not necessary when one Party wishes spontaneously 
to share information or evidence with the other Party.
    Article 18 provides that the Parties will settle any 
disputes regarding interpretation or application of the Treaty 
through consultations.
    Article 19 states that the Parties may make amendments to 
the Treaty by mutual written agreement. Amendments will enter 
into force pursuant to the same procedures as the Treaty 
itself, which are set out in Article 20.
    Article 20 provides that the Treaty is subject to 
ratification by each Party. For the United States, this means 
ratification after the advice and consent of the Senate. The 
Treaty will enter into force upon the exchange of instruments 
of ratification, which will occur through diplomatic channels. 
Article 20 also provides procedures for termination of the 
Treaty.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]