[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 144 (Thursday, October 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11165-S11168]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                TREATIES

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to consider the following treaties on today's Executive 
Calendar: Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. I further ask unanimous consent that 
the treaties be considered as having passed through their various 
parliamentary stages, up to and including the presentation of the 
resolutions of ratification; that all committee provisos, reservations, 
understandings, and declarations be considered agreed to; that any 
statements be printed in the Congressional Record as if read; and that 
the Senate take one vote on the resolutions of ratification to be 
considered as separate votes; further, that when the resolutions of 
ratification are voted upon, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table; that the President be notified of the Senate's action; and that 
following the disposition of the treaties, the Senate return to 
legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for a division vote on the resolutions 
of ratification.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. A division has been requested.
  Senators in favor of the resolutions of ratification will rise and 
stand until counted. (After a pause.) Those opposed will rise and stand 
until counted.
  On a division, two-thirds of the Senators present having voted in the 
affirmative, the resolutions of ratification are agreed to.
  The resolutions of ratification were agreed to as follows:

        Agreement With Hong Kong for the Surrender of Fugitives

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein), That the Senate advise and consent to the 
     ratification of the Agreement Between the Government of the 
     United States of America and the Government of Hong Kong for 
     the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders signed at Hong Kong on 
     December 20, 1996 (Treaty Doc. 105-3), subject to the 
     understandings of subsection (a), the declarations of 
     subsection (b), and the proviso of subsection (c).
       (a) Understandings.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following two understandings, which shall be 
     included in the instrument of ratification, and shall be 
     binding on the President:
       (1) Third party transfers.--The United States understands 
     that Article 16(2) permits the transfer of persons 
     surrendered to Hong Kong under this Agreement beyond the 
     jurisdiction of Hong Kong when the United States so consents, 
     but that the United States will not apply Article 16(2) of 
     the Agreement to permit the transfer of persons surrendered 
     to the Government of Hong Kong to any other jurisdiction in 
     the People's Republic of China, unless the person being 
     surrendered consents to the transfer.
       (2) Hong Kong courts' power of final adjudication.--The 
     United States understands that Hong Kong's courts have the 
     power of final adjudication over all matters within Hong 
     Kong's autonomy as guaranteed in the 1984 Sino-British Joint 
     Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong, signed on December 
     19, 1984, and ratified on May 27, 1985. The United States 
     expects that any exceptions to the jurisdiction of the Hong 
     Kong courts for acts of state shall be construed narrowly. 
     The United States understands that the exemption for acts of 
     state does not diminish the responsibilities of the Hong Kong 
     authorities with respect to extradition or the rights of an 
     individual to a fair trial in Hong Kong courts. Any attempt 
     by the Government of Hong Kong or the Government of the 
     People's Republic of China to curtail the jurisdiction and 
     power of final adjudication of the Hong Kong courts may be 
     considered grounds for withdrawal from the Agreement.
       (b) Declarations.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following two declarations, which shall be 
     binding on the President:
       (1) Report on the hong kong judicial system.--One year 
     after entry into force, the Secretary of State, in 
     coordination with the Attorney General, shall prepare and 
     submit a report to the Committee on Foreign Relations that 
     addresses the following issues during the period after entry 
     into force of the Agreement:
       (i) an assessment of the independence of the Hong Kong 
     judicial system from the Government of the People's Republic 
     of China, including a summary of any instances in which the 
     Government of the People's Republic of China has infringed 
     upon the independence of the Hong Kong judiciary;
       (ii) an assessment of the due process accorded all persons 
     under the jurisdiction of the Government of Hong Kong;
       (iii) an assessment of the due process accorded persons 
     extradited to Hong Kong by the United States;
       (iv) an accounting of the citizenship and number of persons 
     extradited to Hong Kong from the United States, and the 
     citizenship and number of persons extradited to the United 
     States from Hong Kong;
       (v) an accounting of the destination of third party 
     transfer of persons who were originally extradited from the 
     United States, and the citizenship of those persons;
       (vi) a summary of the types of crimes for which persons 
     have been extradited between the United States and Hong Kong.
       (2) Treaty interpretation.--The Senate affirms the 
     applicability to all treaties of the constitutionally based 
     principles of treaty interpretation set forth in Condition 
     (1) of the resolution of ratification with respect to the INF 
     Treaty.
       (c) Proviso.--The resolution of ratification is subject to 
     the following proviso, which shall not be included in the 
     instrument of ratification to be signed by the President:
       (1) Supremacy of the constitution.--Nothing in the Treaty 
     requires or authorizes legislation or other action by the 
     United States of America that is prohibited by the 
     Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the 
     United States.

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I rise to address the United States-Hong 
Kong Extradition Treaty, a treaty which I have followed closely in its 
passage through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
  To most Americans, the seemingly nebulous topic of extradition 
treaties is not particularly important. But let us not be distracted by 
the complex legal jargon that accompanies this

[[Page S11166]]

agreement with Hong Kong. Our extradition agreements strike at the very 
heart of equality before the law, one of our most cherished freedoms in 
America. Our judicial system seeks to protect the due process right of 
foreigner and native citizen alike, and our extradition treaties with 
other nations are based on the premise that any person we transfer to a 
foreign court system will receive similarly just treatment.
  The extradition treaty with Hong Kong is thus a very important 
consideration in assessing the future prospects for freedom in the 
former colony, now under Chinese rule. We need to consider this 
extradition treaty in light of China's overall behavior toward Hong 
Kong in recent months. China's actions to undermine democracy in Hong 
Kong cast doubt on the future of civil liberties in the British colony. 
China has declared the elected Hong Kong legislature invalid and 
appointed a hand-picked provisional legislative body. China's appointed 
chief executive of Hong Kong, Tung Chee-hwa, has announced additional 
measures to restrict civil liberties in the colony.
  Public protests will have to receive prior approval and could be 
banned to protect ``national security.'' Hong Kong political 
organizations will be required to register with the government and will 
be prohibited from seeking or receiving funds from overseas 
organizations. Under China's definition of a Hong Kong political group, 
international organizations that expose China's human rights abuses 
also will be banned from receiving critical foreign funding. In light 
of these troubling steps taken by Beijing, not to mention China's 
violation of trade agreements, weapons proliferation commitments, and 
human rights standards, there are few doubts in my mind that China will 
bend the rules of this extradition treaty we are considering today.
  The extradition treaty contains provisions that supposedly preserve 
due process and the ability of the United States to refuse extradition 
requests that are politically motivated. As with all international 
agreements, however, effective enforcement is essential to protect 
American interests. The strongest treaty language in the world is 
meaningless without presidential vigilance, a vigilance I find 
appallingly lacking in the Clinton administration. This administration 
has failed to confront China consistently on human rights violations, 
trade barriers, and weapons proliferation. I am concerned that the 
administration will adopt a similarly lax attitude in the enforcement 
of this treaty.

  The Clinton administration's defense of Hong Kong in other areas has 
been weak at best. The White House has been hesitant to meet with 
political activists from the colony, and Vice President Gore failed to 
include Hong Kong in the itinerary of his last trip to East Asia. The 6 
million people in Hong Kong deserve better treatment from America. The 
fight to preserve liberty in Hong Kong could be the battle that 
determines the outcome of the overall campaign to cultivate democracy 
in China. Hong Kong serves as yet another example of liberty to over 1 
billion Chinese, and the effective removal of that example would set 
back the march of freedom in China.
  In considering this extradition treaty, we need to be honest. We are 
not signing this treaty with Hong Kong alone, but with Beijing. By 
doing so, we could be placing our stamp of approval on a court system 
that will, by all appearances, increasingly be an extension of the 
Chinese Communist Party.
  The United States has never before signed a treaty to extradite human 
beings to a totalitarian Communist regime, and I hope this treaty will 
not turn into the first example of such policy. The United States has 
been given a great trust as the leader of the free world, and the 
international commitments we make should reflect our country's 
commitment to democracy and the rule of law.
  We in America need to realize that the forces of justice and liberty 
are at work in the Chinese people just as they have been at work with 
such stunning effect in other nations around the world. When China 
embraces democracy--just as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan have done--
the rule of law will follow. Until that day arrives, it will be good to 
say we stood by the Chinese people in their struggle for justice and 
liberty. Effective enforcement of this extradition treaty will be an 
important step in ensuring that the example of freedom in Hong Kong is 
preserved for the benefit of all Chinese.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, the reversion of Hong Kong to the People's 
Republic of China is a historic event, the full impact of which may not 
be known for years. At midnight on June 30, the world watched as the 
flag of the United Kingdom came down over Hong Kong, the final chapter 
of over a century of the British Empire's presence in the Far East. 
July 1 dawned with the flag of China flying over Victoria Harbor, 
providing a great moment of pride for the people of China as Beijing 
recovered a territory lost in humiliating fashion to foreign powers.
  For the cause of freedom, the reversion is a conundrum.
  Some observers warn that China intends to trample Hong Kong's 
freedoms. After a decade in which millions have cast off the yoke of 
Communist rule of the Soviet Empire, the subjugation of the people of 
Hong Kong to the control of a dictatorial government in Beijing is 
surely a sad anomaly.
  Others predict optimistically that in the end China, not Hong Kong, 
will be transformed by the new union. They point to the changes already 
underway in China, and foresee a more prosperous, open, plural, and 
democratic system for one-fifth of the world's population.
  I believe the future of Hong Kong, like that of China, is not yet 
written. The actions of the United States will affect the ability of 
the people of Hong Kong to preserve their democratic freedoms and 
overall quality of life.
  Visiting Washington recently on his first trip abroad as Hong Kong's 
Chief Executive, Tung Chee-hwa rightly took pride in the former 
colony's smooth transition to Chinese rule. But he also candidly 
acknowledged that preserving Hong Kong's economic vitality and 
expanding the democratic freedoms enjoyed by its 5\1/2\ million 
residents required not only a steady hand in Hong Kong, but also the 
sustained interest and support of the international community.
  It is in this context that we must view the U.S.-Hong Kong 
extradition agreement.
  Approval of the treaty is a risk, for it is predicated on a question 
which cannot be answered in the abstract. The question is this: will 
the Beijing Government adhere to its pledge to permit Hong Kong a high 
degree of autonomy for at least 50 years? In other words, will China 
abide by its promise to maintain ``one country, two systems?''
  No one can answer that question definitively today--not the people of 
Hong Kong, not the British Government, not the Clinton 
administration, not even the gerontocracy in Beijing, which struggles 
to chart a course for China's modernization in the post-Deng Xiao Ping 
era.

  Of course, there is always the risk that a treaty partner will prove 
to be unreliable. That risk is particularly acute here, where the 
treaty partner--the Hong Kong Government--will be overseen by a 
government in Beijing which has often failed to adhere adequately to 
commitments made to the United States.
  Standing opposite that risk are the benefits that flow from having an 
extradition relationship with Hong Kong. For most of this decade, the 
relationship has undeniably been in our interests. Since 1991, more 
than 60 persons have been returned to the United States from Hong Kong 
pursuant to extradition requests, many of them for serious crimes such 
as narcotics trafficking. By contrast, we have extradited just seven 
persons to Hong Kong.
  Moreover, the extradition treaty is a critical component of our 
overall law enforcement cooperation with Hong Kong authorities--
cooperation which has proven enormously successful over the years in 
combating organized crime, drug smuggling, and international terrorism.
  Finally, this treaty contains extraordinary protections against any 
attempt by Beijing to meddle with or politicize the extradition 
process.
  Indeed, the treaty provides several protections against valid 
concerns that the PRC may renege on its pledge to permit Hong Kong to 
retain an independent judiciary. The treaty contains several 
safeguards; these include: First, a provision allowing the United 
States broad power to refuse to surrender U.S.

[[Page S11167]]

nationals in cases relating to ``the defense, foreign affairs, or 
essential public interest or policy of the United States'' (Article 3); 
second, a provision permitting the Secretary of State to deny 
extradition if the request was politically motivated, or the person 
sought is likely to be denied a fair trial or punished because of his 
race, religion, nationality, or political opinions (Article 6); and 
third, a provision barring the retransfer of any fugitive beyond the 
territory of Hong Kong without U.S. consent (Article 16).
  The Committee has added included two provisions in the resolution of 
ratification that provide additional protection. First, understanding 
No. 1 makes it plain that the United States will not permit the 
retransfer to the People's Republic of China of any persons surrendered 
under this agreement, unless the person being surrendered consents to 
the transfer. Understanding No. 2 makes a strong statement in support 
of the independence of the Hong Kong judiciary, by stating that any 
effort to curtail the jurisdiction and power of adjudication of the 
Hong Kong courts may be considered grounds for withdrawal from the 
Agreement.
  In exercising its power to advise and consent, the Senate must 
balance the risks that China will interfere with the autonomy of Hong 
Kong against the likely benefits to U.S. law enforcement that will flow 
from the agreement. In my view, the benefits clearly outweigh the 
risks. And the safeguards in the treaty, in addition to the provisions 
in the resolution of ratification, provide strong protection of U.S. 
interests and of the rights of those persons who may be surrendered 
under the treaty.
  By ratifying this treaty, the Senate will send a strong signal to the 
people of Hong Kong that we have confidence in their ability to make 
the unique ``one country, two systems'' formula work. We also send a 
strong message to Beijing that we will not tolerate any efforts to 
undermine the traditional autonomy and impartiality of Hong Kong's 
judiciary. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting ratification 
of the Hong Kong extradition agreement.

  Constitution and Convention of the International Telecommunication 
                                 Union

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein), That the Senate advise and consent to the 
     ratification of the Constitution of the International 
     Telecommunication Union (ITU), with Annexes, signed at Geneva 
     on December 22, 1992, and Amendments to the Constitution and 
     Convention, signed at Kyoto on October 14, 1994, together 
     with Declarations and Reservations by the United States 
     contained in the Final Acts (Treaty Doc. 104-34), subject to 
     declarations and reservations Nos. 68, 73 and 82 of the 1992 
     Final Acts; declarations and reservations Nos. 84, 92, 97, 
     and 98 of the 994 Final Acts; and the understandings of 
     subsection (a), the declarations of subsection (b), and the 
     proviso of subsection (c).
       (a) Understandings.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following two understandings, which shall be 
     included in the instrument of ratification, and shall be 
     binding on the President.
       (1) Broadcasts to cuba.--The United States of America, 
     noting the Statement (No. 40) entered by the delegation of 
     Cuba during the Plenipotentiary Conference of the 
     International Telecommunication Union, in Kyoto Japan, 
     affirms its rights to broadcast to Cuba on appropriate 
     frequencies free of jamming or other wrongful interference 
     and reserves its rights to address existing interference and 
     any future interference, by Cuba with United States 
     broadcasting. Furthermore, the United States of America notes 
     that its presence in Gurantanamo is by virtue of an 
     international agreement presently in force; the United States 
     of America reserves the right to meet its radio communication 
     requirements there as heretofore.
       (2) Geostationary-satellite orbits.--The United States 
     understands that the reference in Article 44 of the 
     Constitution to the ``geographical situation of particular 
     countries'' does not imply a recognition of claim to any 
     preferential rights to the geostationary-satellite orbit.
       (b) Declarations.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following two declarations, which shall be 
     binding on the President:
       (1) Assessed payments to the united nations international 
     telecommunication union.--Payments by the United States to 
     the International Telecommunication Union shall be limited to 
     assessed contributions, appropriated by Congress. This 
     provision does not apply to United States payments 
     voluntarily made for a specific purpose other than the 
     payment of assessed contributions. The United States shall 
     seek to amend Article 33(3) of the ITU Convention to 
     eliminate to ITU's authority to impose interest payments on 
     ITU members.
       (2) Treaty interpretation.--The Senate affirms the 
     applicability to all treaties of the constitutionally based 
     principles of treaty interpretation set forth in Condition 
     (1) of the resolution of ratification of the INF Treaty, 
     approved by the Senate on May 27, 1998, and Condition (8) of 
     the resolution of ratification of the Document Agreed Among 
     the States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces 
     in Europe, approved by the Senate on May 14, 1997.
       (c) Proviso.--The Senate's resolution of ratification is 
     subject to the following proviso, which shall be binding on 
     the President:
       (1) Supremacy of the constitution.--Nothing in the Treaty 
     requires or authorizes legislation or other action by the 
     United States of America that is prohibited by the 
     Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the 
     United States.
                                                                    ____


Treaty on Maritime Boundaries Between the United States of America and 
                       the United Mexican States

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein), That the Senate advise and consent to the 
     ratification of the Treaty on Maritime Boundaries between the 
     United States of America and the United Mexican States, 
     signed at Mexico City on May 4, 1978 (Ex. F, 96-1), subject 
     to the declaration of subsection (a), and the proviso of 
     subsection (b).
       (a) Declaration.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following declaration, which shall be binding 
     on the President:
       (1) Treaty interpretation.--The Senate affirms the 
     applicability to all treaties of the constitutionally based 
     principles of treaty interpretation set forth in Condition 
     (1) of the resolution of ratification of the INF Treaty, 
     approved by the Senate on May 27, 1988, and Condition (8) of 
     the resolution of ratification of the Document Agreed Among 
     the States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces 
     in Europe, approved by the Senate on May 14, 1997.
       (b) Proviso.--The resolution of ratification is subject to 
     the following proviso, which shall be binding on the 
     President:
       (1) Supremacy of the constitution.--Nothing in the Treaty 
     requires or authorizes legislation or other action by the 
     United States of America that is prohibited by the 
     Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the 
     United States.
                                                                    ____


    Protocol Between the United States and Canada Amending the 1916 
  Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds in Canada and the 
                             United States

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein), That the Senate advise and consent to the 
     ratification of the Protocol Between the United States and 
     Canada Amending the 1916 Convention for the Protection of 
     Migratory Birds in Canada and the United States, with Related 
     Exchange of Notes, signed at Washington on December 14, 1995 
     (Treaty Doc. 104-28), subject to the understanding of 
     subsection (a), the declaration of subsection (b), and the 
     proviso of subsection (c).
       (a) Understanding.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following understanding, which shall be 
     included in the instrument of ratification, and shall be 
     binding on the President:
       (1) Indigenous inhabitants.--The United States understands 
     that the term ``indigenous inhabitants'' as used in Article 
     II(4)(b) means a permanent resident of a village within a 
     subsistence harvest area, regardless of race. In its 
     implementation of Article II(4)(b), the United States also 
     understands that where it is appropriate to recognize a need 
     to assist indigenous inhabitants in meeting nutritional and 
     other essential needs, or for the teaching of cultural 
     knowledge to or by their family members, there may be cases 
     where, with the permission of the village council and the 
     appropriate permits, immediate family members of indigenous 
     inhabitants may be invited to participate in the customary 
     spring and summer subsistence harvest.
       (b) Declaration.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following declaration, which shall be binding 
     on the President:
       (1) Treaty interpretation.--The Senate affirms the 
     applicability to all treaties of the constitutionally based 
     principles of treaty interpretation set forth in Condition 
     (1) of the resolution of ratification of the INF Treaty, 
     approved by the Senate on May 27, 1988, and Condition (8) of 
     the resolution of ratification of the Document Agreed Among 
     the States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces 
     in Europe, approved by the Senate on May 14, 1997.
       (c) Proviso.--The resolution of ratification is subject to 
     the following proviso, which shall be binding on the 
     President;
       (1) Supremacy of the constitution.--Nothing in the Treaty 
     requires or authorizes legislation or other action by the 
     United States of America that is prohibited by the 
     Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the 
     United States.
                                                                    ____


Protocol Between the Government of the United States of America and the 
Government of the United Mexican States Amending the Convention for the 
            Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals.

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein, That the Senate advise and consent to the 
     ratification of the Protocol between the Government of the 
     United

[[Page S11168]]

     States of America and the Government of the United Mexican 
     States Amending the Convention for the Protection of 
     Migratory Birds and Game Mammals, signed at Mexico City on 
     May 5, 1997 (Treaty Doc. 105-26), subject to the 
     understanding of subsection (a), the declaration of 
     subsection (b), and the proviso of subsection (c).
       (a) Understanding.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following understanding, which shall be 
     included in the instrument of ratification, and shall be 
     binding on the President:
       (1) Indigenous inhabitants.--The United States understands 
     that the term ``indigenous inhabitants'' as used in Article I 
     means a permanent resident of a village within a subsistence 
     harvest area, regardless of race. In its implementation of 
     Article I, the United States also understands that where it 
     is appropriate to recognize a need to assist indigenous 
     inhabitants in meeting nutritional and other essential needs, 
     or for the teaching of cultural knowledge to or by their 
     family members, there may be cases where, with the permission 
     of the village council and the appropriate permits, immediate 
     family members of indigenous inhabitants may be invited to 
     participate in the customary spring and summer subsistence 
     harvest.
       (b) Declaration.--The Senate's advice and consent is 
     subject to the following declaration, which shall be binding 
     on the President:
       (1) Treaty interpretation.--The Senate affirms the 
     applicability to all treaties of the constitutionally based 
     principles of treaty interpretation set forth in Condition 
     (1) of the resolution of ratification of the INF Treaty, 
     approved by the Senate on May 27, 1998, and Condition (8) of 
     the resolution of ratification of the Document Agreed Among 
     the States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces 
     in Europe, approved by the Senate on May 14, 1997.
       (c) Proviso.--The resolution of ratification is subject to 
     the following proviso, which shall be binding on the 
     President:
       (1) Supremacy of the constitution.--Nothing in the Treaty 
     requires or authorizes legislation or other action by the 
     United States of America that is prohibited by the 
     Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the 
     United States.

  Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent to propound a parliamentary inquiry 
concerning the treaties that were agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, did the Chair actually count Senators on the 
division that took place with respect to the adoption of the resolution 
of ratification of those treaties?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair is required to and so did.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, those treaties were the Agreement with Hong 
Kong for the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders; the International 
Telecommunications Union Constitution and Convention; the U.S.-Mexico 
Treaty on Maritime Boundaries; the Migratory Bird Protocol with Canada; 
and the Migratory Bird Protocol with Mexico.

                          ____________________