[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 146 (Wednesday, October 14, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10855-H10857]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




REQUIRING THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO SUBMIT AN ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS 
                     CONCERNING DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 759) to amend the State Department Basic Authorities 
Act of 1956 to require the Secretary of State to submit an annual 
report to Congress concerning diplomatic immunity.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                 S. 759

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. REPORTS AND POLICY CONCERNING DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY.

       Title I, of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 
     1956 (22 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.; commonly referred to as the 
     ``Foreign Missions Act'') is amended by inserting after 
     section 204A the following new section:

     ``SEC. 204B. CRIMES COMMITTED BY DIPLOMATS.

       ``(a) Annual Report Concerning Diplomatic Immunity.--
       ``(1) Report to congress.--The Secretary of State shall 
     prepare and submit to the Congress, annually, a report 
     concerning diplomatic immunity entitled ``Report on Cases 
     Involving Diplomatic Immunity''.
       ``(2) Content of report.--In addition to such other 
     information as the Secretary of State may consider 
     appropriate, the report under paragraph (1) shall include the 
     following:
       ``(A) The number of persons residing in the United States 
     who enjoy full immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the 
     United States under laws extending diplomatic privileges and 
     immunities.
       ``(B) Each case involving an alien described in 
     subparagraph (A) in which an appropriate authority of a 
     State, a political subdivision of a State, or the United 
     States reported to the Department of State that the authority 
     had reasonable cause to believe the alien committed a serious 
     criminal offense within the United States, and any additional 
     information provided to the Secretary relating to other 
     serious criminal offenses that any such authority had 
     reasonable cause to believe the alien committed before the 
     period covered by the report. The Secretary may omit from 
     such report any matter the provision of which the Secretary 
     reasonably believes would compromise a criminal investigation 
     or prosecution or which would directly compromise law 
     enforcement or intelligence sources or methods.
       ``(C) Each case described in subparagraph (B) in which the 
     Secretary of State has certified that a person enjoys full 
     immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the United States 
     under laws extending diplomatic privileges and immunities.
       ``(D) The number of United States citizens who are residing 
     in a receiving state and who enjoy full immunity from the 
     criminal jurisdiction of such state under laws extending 
     diplomatic privileges and immunities.
       ``(E) Each case involving a United States citizen under 
     subparagraph (D) in which the United States has been 
     requested by the government of a receiving state to waive the 
     immunity from criminal jurisdiction of the United States 
     citizen.
       ``(F) Whether the Secretary has made the notifications 
     referred to in subsection (c) during the period covered by 
     the report.
       ``(3) Serious criminal offense defined.--For the purposes 
     of this section, the term `serious criminal offense' means--
       ``(A) any felony under Federal, State, or local law;
       ``(B) any Federal, State, or local offense punishable by a 
     term of imprisonment of more than 1 year;
       ``(C) any crime of violence as defined for purposes of 
     section 16 of title 18, United States Code; or
       ``(D)(i) driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
       ``(ii) reckless driving; or
       ``(iii) driving while intoxicated.
       ``(b) United States Policy Concerning Reform of Diplomatic 
     Immunity.--It is the sense of the Congress that the Secretary 
     of State should explore, in appropriate fora, whether states 
     should enter into agreements and adopt legislation--
       ``(1) to provide jurisdiction in the sending state to 
     prosecute crimes committed in the receiving state by persons 
     entitled to immunity from criminal jurisdiction under laws 
     extending diplomatic privileges and immunities; and
       ``(2) to provide that where there is probable cause to 
     believe that an individual who is entitled to immunity from 
     the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state under laws 
     extending diplomatic privileges and immunities committed a 
     serious crime, the sending state will waive such immunity or 
     the sending state will prosecute such individual.
       ``(c) Notification of Diplomatic Corps.--The Secretary 
     should periodically notify each foreign mission of United 
     States policies relating to criminal offenses committed by 
     individuals with immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of 
     the United States under laws extending diplomatic privileges 
     and immunities.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Gilman) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 days within which to revise and extend their remarks on S. 
759.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to bring this bill before the 
House sponsored by the gentleman from San Dimas, California (Mr. 
Dreier), the distinguished senior member of the Committee on Rules. 
This is a measure that is substantially identical to a provision that 
has passed the House, is a portion of another bill, the enactment of 
which into law is still uncertain in the other body. It is 
noncontroversial, and it is backed by organizations such as the 
Fraternal Order of Police, and the calls upon the President to seek to 
reform the practice of diplomatic immunity so as to assure that 
diplomats who commit crime are punished either in the country where 
they are posted or in their home country. It also provides for 
enhancing reporting of crimes by diplomats in this Nation and 
encourages the Secretary of State to communicate clearly to foreign 
missions in our Nation our Nation's policy of zero tolerance for 
diplomatic crimes.
  This bill is a counterpart of a bill, H.R. 1672 introduced by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) who has

[[Page H10856]]

been a leader in the effort to accomplish sensible reform of diplomatic 
immunity, and the passage of this bill at this time is a tribute to Mr. 
Dreier's dedication. The gentleman from California is an 
internationalist who recognizes the importance of American diplomatic 
missions abroad and of the presence of their counterparts in our 
Nation. But he also understands that diplomats should not be able to 
have free rein to commit crimes.
  I should note that the legislation also draws on elements of an 
amendment propounded by H.R. 1757 by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley). I salute his contributions and, of course, the leadership of 
the senator from Georgia, Mr. Coverdell who is a sponsor of the Senate 
bill which we are considering today.
  This bill is worthy legislation, and it deserves the support of our 
colleagues.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume, and I rise in support of the bill.
  Let me begin by commending the distinguished chairman of the 
committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), and Senator 
Coverdell and the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) for their work 
in bringing this bill to the floor today. The bill would require the 
State Department to provide an annual report to Congress on foreign 
diplomats in the United States who commit serious crimes. I think it is 
a very worthy bill. Such a report would enable us to determine the 
gravity of offenses committed by foreign diplomats and the number of 
times diplomatic immunity has been requested by foreign government in 
U.S. prosecutions. At the same time the report would also track cases 
where foreign countries have asked the United States to waive immunity 
for U.S. diplomats who have committed serious crimes. So I think the 
report does serve a useful purpose.
  My only concern about the bill is, of course, the number of times we 
place upon the administration the burden and the cost of reports, and 
we have to be cognizant of that, but I do recognize hear the 
information that is required by this report can be very helpful to us 
in assessing this possible abuse of diplomatic immunity.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.
  Madam Speaker I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from San Dimas, California (Mr. Dreier), the author of this 
measure.

                              {time}  1200

  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Middletown, the 
distinguished chairman of the Committee on International Relations, and 
I appreciate his strong support and leadership on this issue in helping 
us shepherd it through.
  I would also like to say to my friend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Hamilton) that I have appreciated his understanding of the need to deal 
with what obviously is a very important issue and his support, as he 
just stated, of the legislation.
  Let me just take one moment, and I know that I had the privilege 
during the special order that we had the other evening to enter some 
very strong words in support of Lee Hamilton and making it clear he is 
going to be sorely missed when he retires at the end of this Congress, 
and we do not know exactly when that will be, so his service may be 
extending further than he anticipated. We already know, having gone for 
several days, that it has done that.
  But it has been a privilege for me to have worked closely with Lee 
Hamilton on a number of issues. This obviously is one of them, issues 
dealing with the committee which he used to Chair and now, I am happy 
to say, serves as ranking minority member of the Committee on 
International Relations, formerly the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and 
I should say that actually is one of the issues we spent a great deal 
of time working on, trying our darnedest to bring about a modicum of 
reform of this institution.
  We had the privilege in 1993, I guess that was the 103d Congress, to 
work together on an overall reform of the institution. I was privileged 
to serve as his co-vice chairman of what was called the Joint Committee 
on the Organization of Congress. Unfortunately, we were not able to get 
many, really none of those recommendations, that we had through in the 
103d Congress. But when we did come to majority in 1995, we were able 
to take large parts of the work product which Lee Hamilton had overseen 
and were able to implement that.
  I also would like to say on the issue of global trade, there has been 
no one who has been more passionate and committed to what I think is 
the correct position than Lee Hamilton. He is a strong free-trader, and 
we worked long and hard on our goal of expanding western values through 
trade internationally, and he will be sorely missed in that effort as 
we continue to pursue fast track, normal trade relations with the 
People's Republic of China and a number of other issues in the years to 
come.
  I would like to say, what a great friend, and I wish Lee and Nancy 
well in their retirement. Lee showed his great brilliance by selecting 
a Californian as his wife, and I know that they will be here in 
Washington in this great spot at the Wilson Center and also at the 
Indiana University.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I just want to thank the gentleman for 
his very kind and generous and even magnanimous remarks, and to say it 
has been for me too a magnificent privilege to work with you. I do not 
want to try to make a prediction about the elections coming up, but I 
know that if they turn out favorably for the majority party here, the 
gentleman in the well now will have very, very major responsibilities 
in the next Congress. I have no doubt that he will discharge those 
well, and we wish him well. Thank you very much.
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank my friend.
  Madam Speaker, let me just take a moment to again express my 
appreciation of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) for moving 
this legislation forward. This is a very important measure. The 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) and the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Gilman) had it incorporated in the Foreign Assistance 
Authorization Act, and we all know exactly what happened to that. 
Unfortunately, we have not been able to see that bill become public 
law.
  But last year, just into this Congress, we all heard, the world 
heard, about the horrible tragedy of the killing of Jovian Waldrich, a 
16 year old girl who was run over by a drunken diplomat from the State 
of Georgia. It seems to me that when this problem came to the 
forefront, it focused attention on the issue of diplomatic immunity.
  We recognized that repeal of diplomatic immunity, obviously, could be 
devastating for our national interests. We cannot have in other 
countries people have their lives jeopardized and threatened by 
governments if we were to repeal diplomatic immunity. That conceivably 
could happen. So diplomatic immunity is a very important thing.
  But with the dramatic increase in the number of diplomats that we 
have seen in this country and throughout the world, there has been 
abuse, and when you have the tragic loss of life and some of the other 
horrendous instances that have been reported to me, of raping and other 
crimes that have been inflicted against our citizenry, and diplomatic 
immunity has been claimed, it seems to me we need to take some kind of 
action to bring about reform.
  This bill, which we have been working, as I said, for nearly two 
years on with our friends, is one which is designed to really make sure 
that, first, we have a reporting from the State Department on the 
instances of diplomatic immunity being used, and then it is our hope 
that we can see accountability come about, where we will have the 
nations involved actually take responsibility for the actions of their 
representatives who are here in this country.
  It is my hope that if crimes are perpetrated here in the United 
States or anywhere in the world, that these diplomats or their family 
members who use diplomatic immunity will be sent back to their home 
countries and face

[[Page H10857]]

full responsibility for the actions that they have perpetrated here.
  So I am a supporter of diplomatic immunity. I believe it is a very 
important tool for us. But I believe also when you look at the tragic 
loss of Jovian Waldrich and the countless other victims of those who 
have been victims of those who have used diplomatic immunity to free 
themselves of responsibility, that this is a step towards addressing 
that.
  So I again thank my colleagues, and I believe this is a very 
important measure, and urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for his very 
persuasive arguments on behalf of the bill. It is worthy legislation, 
and I hope our colleagues will join with him in support of this 
measure.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Aviation, who is a cosponsor, along with the gentleman from California, 
of the House counterpart of this bill.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, I would like first to thank the gentleman 
from New York (Chairman Gilman) and other members of the committee for 
bringing this important legislation to the floor today, which is almost 
identical to a bill that the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) and 
myself introduced in the House early last year.
  I would also like to thank Senator Coverdell, a senior member of the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, for introducing the same 
legislation in the Senate.
  This language, the language in this bill, will encourage the State 
Department to hold diplomats accountable for crimes committed in the 
United States, and it is the first time that we have had legislation 
that will attempt to accomplish this.
  Specifically, the bill urges the State Department to pursue waivers 
of diplomatic immunity when foreign diplomats commit serious crimes in 
the United States. In addition, if a foreign government of a diplomat 
who commits a crime will not agree to waive immunity, that government 
will be encouraged to prosecute the criminal for the same offense in 
their own courts.
  Madam Speaker, this problem was brought to the forefront last year in 
Washington when a 16 year old girl was killed by a diplomat who was 
driving while drunk. This diplomat could have avoided prosecution under 
diplomatic immunity.
  I believe this case and others have shown us that we need to take a 
serious look at how the current system operates. In fact, it has been 
reported that there has been on average one death a year over the last 
10 years in which a diplomat has been involved when the perpetrator was 
not charged. We need to make foreign representatives in this country 
know that they will be held accountable when they commit terrible 
crimes. I welcome all people, all of us welcome all people of all 
nationalities into this country, but, at the same time, I do not think 
diplomats should have the right to come here and kill or commit other 
serious crimes against U.S. citizens without expecting punishment.
  Again, Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman and the 
other members of the Committee on International Relations for 
recognizing this problem and for moving on this legislation to attempt 
to correct this problem.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield three minutes to 
the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I want to take this time to say something 
that has absolutely nothing to do with this bill. I do simply want to 
say that when the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) retires, this 
institution will have lost one of the most thoughtful human beings who 
has ever walked the floor of this House.
  Of all of the relationships that I have had through the years in this 
House, it is hard for me to think of one that has made me feel more 
rewarded than the relationship I have had with the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) in dealing with our mutual responsibilities in 
the area of international affairs.
  When Congresses deal with foreign affairs, usually we are dealing 
with issues that are not very well understood by our constituents and, 
frankly, often not very well understood by a number of our colleagues 
as well.
  Often in dealing with international affairs, the right thing for our 
country is to do something which may not be, for the moment, very 
popular. That has never stopped the gentleman from Indiana from doing 
exactly what he has thought was right for this country on each and 
every occasion that I have ever dealt with him, whether the issue is 
seeing to it that we have a constructive policy in the Middle East, or 
whether it is searching for ways to open up lines of assistance to the 
newly emerging democracies that were behind the Iron Curtain, or 
whether it is dealing with the economic problems that we face in Asia 
on each and every issue, the gentleman from Indiana has simply asked 
what is in the best long-term interests of the United States. He has 
stood on principle, and yet he has not been afraid to look for 
reasonable compromises that did not compromise those principles.
  I, for one, will very much miss him, and I am certain that every 
thoughtful Member of this House would share my views and say that the 
country is experiencing a major loss with his departure from this 
institution. But I know that in his next work, he will also be 
contributing to the long-term interests of this country.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, let me just say I appreciate very deeply 
the comments the gentleman from Wisconsin has made. He and I have had 
an opportunity to work on a great many foreign policy issues over a 
period of years, and everything you have said about me I return in 
spades for you. It has been a great pleasure to work with you. I thank 
you for your kind and generous remarks.
  Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 759.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that 
a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is 
not present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5, rule I, and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________