[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 50 (Tuesday, April 13, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3634-S3636]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. SESSIONS (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 768. A bill to establish court-martial jurisdiction over civilians 
serving with the Armed Forces during contingency operations, and to 
establish Federal jurisdiction over crimes committee outside the United 
States by former members of the Armed Forces and civilians accompanying 
the Armed Forces outside the United States; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


         military and extraterritorial jurisdiction act of 1999

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Military and 
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 1999. This bill will close a legal 
loophole through which civilians who commit crimes while accompanying 
the Armed Forces overseas evade punishment. Today, when a civilian 
accompanies the military outside the United States, whether a relative, 
a dependent, or a civilian contractor--and there are many--the civilian 
is not subject to prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice and does not fall under any of the general Federal criminal 
laws.
  These individuals can only be prosecuted for their crimes if the host 
country chooses to do so. However, there are many circumstances in 
which the host country does not choose to

[[Page S3635]]

prosecute. They just often do not have an interest in the case. 
Additionally, in situations such as Somalia and Haiti, when our troops 
are rapidly deployed, typically no agreement exists governing how 
civilians will be prosecuted until months into the operation. Indeed, 
many times there are no laws in effect really in those countries. So we 
believe that something must be done in this regard.
  There is a glaring deficiency here and it has come to my attention 
through a tragic incident. A U.S. Army dependent, not a soldier, living 
on an Army base in Germany, sexually molested two dependent children. 
The Army investigators found probable cause to believe that the sexual 
acts had occurred. However, under German law, no action could be taken 
against this juvenile.
  Sometimes prosecutors are restricted by legal prohibitions, and 
sometimes they just have no interest in prosecuting a case involving 
Americans.
  As of March 31, 1996, there were more than 240,000 family dependents 
and 96,000 civilian employees overseas. These persons accompany our 
troops to represent the United States, but many times they are in 
effect outside the law.
  In addition to the sexual molestation incident that I have already 
mentioned, examples of crimes that have gone unpunished due do this 
loophole are rape, assault, battery, vandalism, and drug dealing. 
Although the offenders may receive some sort of administrative 
punishment, such as being barred from certain areas of the base or 
monetary fines, these administrative noncriminal penalties are 
inadequate for the more serious violations.
  Because the military continues to rely heavily on civilian assistance 
and support, the United States must develop an appropriate and 
effective criminal process to deal with the misbehavior of civilians. 
It is important to the morale of our military forces that enlisted men 
and women working outside the United States along with civilian 
personnel do not believe that civilians who may commit a crime against 
them are beyond criminal prosecution.
  This bill would extend the reach of title 18 of the United States 
Criminal Code to include those civilians that accompany the military 
outside the United States. When one of these civilians commits an 
offense that Congress has established as a maritime crime, the U.S. 
attorney's office would have the option to exercise jurisdiction and 
prosecute the offender in the United States. The bill would employ 
title 18, United States Code section 3238, which provides that an 
accused be tried in the U.S. district court where the offender first 
appears when he is brought back to the United States.

  Finally, in order to prevent legal conflicts with a jurisdiction 
recognized by the United States, this bill only applies if the host 
country has already prosecuted or is in the process of prosecuting the 
accused.
  The need for this legislation was most recently described in a report 
submitted by the Overseas Jurisdiction Advisory Committee to the 
Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and to this Congress. This 
panel was established in section 1151 of the 1996 National Defense 
Authorization Act.
  In the act, Congress recognized this jurisdictional loophole needed 
to be examined so it established this advisory committee to study the 
problems of civilians who commit criminal acts when accompanying the 
Armed Forces overseas. This committee was composed of experts in 
military and civilian law from all branches of the armed services, the 
Department of Justice, and the State Department. The advisory committee 
found that this problem was serious enough that ``legislation is needed 
to address misconduct by civilians accompanying the forces overseas in 
peacetime settings.'' These experts believed that the jurisdictional 
void must be closed to ``maintain order and discipline.''
  The American Government must have the authority to discipline people 
it sends overseas to represent and serve this country. It is 
inconsistent with the American system of justice that a civilian 
employee working with service members and dependents of service members 
not be subject to American criminal laws. This piece of legislation is 
an important step toward recognizing the changing nature of our Armed 
Forces and making sure that the Criminal Code is keeping pace with the 
military's changing dynamic.
  As a former U.S. attorney for 12 years myself, and one who has met 
frequently with victims, nothing can be more frustrating than to see a 
person or a family victimized by some awful act and have to tell them: 
There is no law that will vindicate you. Even though under various 
other circumstances it would be a plain crime, for some technical 
reason there is not a way to legally right this wrong.
  So I believe this is an important bill. It closes a loophole 
involving more and more Americans each year. We simply do not need to 
cede away the authority to prosecute criminal acts to nations that may 
have no interest whatsoever in vindicating the rights of an American 
service man or woman who has been a victim of a crime.
  I believe this is an important act. It has broad support, the support 
of the military and support of other officials of this Government. We 
think it is a needed step and I commend it to my fellow Members of the 
Senate.
  I also want to express my appreciation for an Alabama family whose 
child was a victim of a crime, a sexual act, in a foreign country, who 
is here in this Capitol today, at the Senate today, and without whose 
support and encouragement this piece of legislation would not become 
law and would not have reached this point.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, Senator 
Sessions, to reintroduce legislation that would close the loopholes 
that permit civilians accompanying the Armed Forces and those serving 
with the Armed Forces from evading punishment for crimes they committed 
while abroad. Under current law, many illegal acts committed abroad by 
dependents, civilian employees, and those servicing with the Armed 
Forces go substantially unaddressed by either military or civilian 
courts. Administrative punishments have proven equally inadequate to 
address this problem.
  When civilians accompany the Armed Services outside the United 
States, they are not subject to prosecution under Federal criminal law 
or the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This has proven to be a 
double-edged sword. While foreign nations frequently have no interest 
in vindicating crimes committed by American civilians against other 
Americans, despite the extreme seriousness of the offense, there have 
been instances where the United States has had to turn over American 
civilians to host countries for potentially harsh punishment because of 
the absence of appropriate enforcement action. Unfortunately, this 
problem is likely to worsen as there are a large number of dependents 
overseas, and the number of civilian employees of the Armed Services 
overseas is increasing. As for those serving with the Armed Forces, 
criminal prosecutions by the military court or administrative 
alternatives sometimes simply discharge the individual and send them 
home, rather than imposing any serious punishment for a crime.
  The case that has united Senator Sessions and me behind this 
legislation is that of an Ohio resident, Amy McGough, who was stationed 
in Germany, along with her husband who is from Alabama. Mrs. McGough's 
8-year-old son and 5-year-old daughter were repeatedly raped and 
molested by a neighbor boy who was supposed to be baby-sitting them. 
While the Criminal Investigations Division of the Army found sufficient 
facts, neither the Army nor Federal prosecutors had jurisdiction to 
prosecute the case, and the German government would not intervene 
because of the age of the perpetrator.
  In such cases, our bill would guarantee that civilians, or those 
serving with the Armed Forces in certain circumstances, who commit an 
illegal act punishable under the Federal law by more than a year's 
imprisonment, will be subject to the special maritime or territorial 
jurisdiction of the United States for prosecution by a military court 
or for Federal criminal prosecution. Neither civilians connected with 
the Armed Forces nor those serving with the Armed Forces abroad accused 
of rape, child molestation or some other serious felony will simply be 
allowed to resign or leave the foreign country to avoid punishment. 
They will be subject to Federal prosecution.

[[Page S3636]]

  We need to make sure that an appropriate criminal process exists in 
these circumstances. Letting these individuals back on America's 
streets does little to hold them accountable, and nothing to protect 
our communities here at home. I appreciate the efforts of my colleague, 
Senator Sessions, who is also a member of the Armed Services Committee, 
in working with me to introduce this legislation to address our mutual 
concern.
                                 ______