U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

69–118 ★ (Star Print) 

" ! SENATE 110TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

TREATY DOC. 

2008

110–12 

EXTRADITION TREATY WITH BULGARIA AND AN 

AGREEMENT ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MUTUAL 

LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS WITH 

BULGARIA 

MESSAGE 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING

EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA (THE ‘‘EXTRADITION TREATY’’ OR THE 

‘‘TREATY’’) AND THE AGREEMENT ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS BETWEEN 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA (THE ‘‘MLA 

AGREEMENT’’), BOTH SIGNED AT SOFIA ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2007 

JANUARY 22, 2008.—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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
(III)

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 

THE WHITE HOUSE, January 22, 2008. 

To the Senate of the United States: 

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to 

ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition Treaty between 

the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria (the ‘‘Extradition Treaty’’ or the ‘‘Treaty’’) and the Agreement on Certain Aspects of Mutual Legal 

Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Government of the 

United States of America and the Government of the Republic of 

Bulgaria (the ‘‘MLA Agreement’’), both signed at Sofia on September 19, 2007. I also transmit, for the information of the Senate, 

the report of the Department of State with respect to the Extradition Treaty and the MLA Agreement. 

The new Extradition Treaty would replace the outdated Extradition Treaty between the United States and Bulgaria, signed in 

Sofia on March 19, 1924, and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty, signed in Washington countries on mutual legal assistance in 

on June 8, 1934. between the two criminal matters. The MLA 

Agreement is the first agreement Both the Extradition Treaty and 

the MLA Agreement fulfill the requirements for bilateral instruments (between the United States and each European Union (EU) 

Member State) that are contained in the Extradition and Mutual 

Legal Assistance Agreements between the United States and the 

EU currently before the Senate. 

The Extradition Treaty follows generally the form and content of 

other extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. 

It would replace an outmoded list of extraditable offenses with a 

modern ‘‘dual criminality’’ approach, which would enable extradition for such offenses as money laundering, and other newer offenses not appearing on the list. The Treaty also contains a modernized ‘‘political offense’’ clause, and it provides that extradition 

shall not be refused based on the nationality of a person sought for 

any of a comprehensive list of serious offenses. Finally, the new 

Treaty incorporates a series of procedural improvements to streamline and speed the extradition process. 

Because the United States and Bulgaria do not have a bilateral 

mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, the MLA 

Agreement is a partial treaty governing only those issues regulated 

by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, specifically: 

identification of bank information, joint investigative teams, videoconferencing, expedited transmission of requests, assistance to administrative authorities, use limitations, confidentiality, and 

grounds for refusal. This approach is consistent with that taken 

with the other EU Member States (Denmark, Finland, Malta, PorVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:29 Mar 12, 2008 Jkt 069118 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\TD012.XXX TD012

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
IV

tugal, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia) with which the United States 

did not have an existing mutual legal assistance treaty. 

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Extradition Treaty and MLA Agreement, along with 

the U.S.-EU Extradition and Mutual Legal Assistance Agreements 

and the other related bilateral instruments between the United 

States and European Union Member States. 

GEORGE W. BUSH. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
(V)

LETTER OF SUBMITTAL 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 1, 2007. 

The PRESIDENT, 

The White House. 

THE PRESIDENT: I have the honor to submit to you the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of 

America and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria (the ‘‘Extradition Treaty’’) and the Agreement on Certain Aspects of Mutual 

Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Government of 

the United States of America and the Government of the Republic 

of Bulgaria (the ‘‘MLA Agreement’’), both signed at Sofia on September 19, 2007. Upon its entry into force, the Extradition Treaty 

would replace the Extradition Treaty between the United States 

and Bulgaria, signed at Sofia on March 19, 1924, and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty, signed at Washington on June 8, 

1934. The MLA Agreement is the first treaty between the two 

countries on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. The Extradition Treaty and the MLA Agreement fulfill the requirements 

of the Agreements on Extradition and Mutual Legal Assistance between the United States of America and the European Union, both 

signed on June 25, 2003, which were transmitted to the Senate on 

September 28, 2006, for implementing bilateral instruments between the United States and each member state of the European 

Union. The article-by-article analyses of the two instruments are 

enclosed in this report. I recommend that the Extradition Treaty 

and the MLA Agreement be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification. Both instruments are self-executing and will not require implementing legislation. 

Respectfully submitted, 

CONDOLEEZZA RICE. 

Enclosures: Overviews and analyses of the provisions of the Extradition Treaty and MLA Agreement. 

EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED

STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF

BULGARIA

OVERVIEW

The Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United 

States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria 

(the ‘‘Extradition Treaty’’ or the ‘‘Treaty’’) replaces an outdated 

1924 extradition treaty, as amended by a 1934 supplementary treaty. This new Extradition Treaty also serves to implement, as beVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:29 Mar 12, 2008 Jkt 069118 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD012.XXX TD012

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
VI

tween the United States and Bulgaria, the provisions of the Agreement on Extradition between the United States of America and the 

European Union (the ‘‘U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement’’), currently 

before the Senate. 

The following is an article-by-article description of the provisions 

of the Treaty. 

Article 1 obligates each Party to extradite to the other, pursuant 

to the provisions of the Treaty, persons sought by authorities in the 

Requesting State for prosecution or for imposition or execution of 

a sentence for an extraditable offense. 

Article 2, which is taken from Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, defines extraditable offenses. Article 2(1) defines 

an offense as extraditable if the conduct on which the offense is 

based is punishable under the laws in both States by deprivation 

of liberty for a period of more than one year or by a more severe 

penalty. The approach taken in the Treaty with respect to extraditable offenses is consistent with the modern ‘‘dual criminality’’

approach, rather than the old ‘‘list’’ approach, and is one of the key 

benefits of the new Treaty. Use of a ‘‘dual criminality’’ clause, rather than the categories of offenses listed in the 1924 Treaty, obviates the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as additional 

offenses become punishable under the laws in both States and ensures a comprehensive coverage of criminal conduct for which extradition might be sought. 

Article 2(2) further defines an extraditable offense to include an 

attempt or a conspiracy to commit, or participation in the commission of, an extraditable offense. The Parties intended to include, 

under the broad description of ‘‘participation,’’ the offenses of aiding, abetting, counseling, or procuring the commission of an offense, as well as being an accessory to an offense. 

Additional direction is provided by Article 2(3), which provides 

that an offense shall be an extraditable offense regardless of 

whether: (a) the laws in the Requesting and Requested States place 

the acts or omissions constituting the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology; 

(b) the offense is one for which United States federal law requires 

the showing of such matters as interstate transportation, or use of 

the mails or of other facilities affecting interstate or foreign commerce, such matters being jurisdictional only; or (c) in criminal 

cases relating to taxes, customs duties, currency control or commodities, the laws of the Requesting and Requested States provide 

for the same kinds of taxes, customs duties or controls on currency 

or on the import or export of the same kinds of commodities. 

With regard to offenses committed outside the territory of the 

Requesting State, Article 2(4) provides that extradition shall be 

granted in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty if the laws 

of the Requested State provide for the punishment of such conduct 

committed outside its territory in similar circumstances. If the laws 

of the Requested State do not provide for the punishment of such 

conduct committed outside of its territory in similar circumstances, 

the executive authority of the Requested State, in its discretion, 

may proceed with extradition provided that all other requirements 

for extradition are met. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
VII

Article 2(5) provides that, if extradition is granted for an extraditable offense, it shall also be granted for any other offense specified in the request if the latter offense is punishable by one year’s 

deprivation of liberty or less, provided that all other requirements 

for extradition are met. 

Article 2(6) provides that, where the extradition request is for enforcement of a sentence, the deprivation of liberty remaining to be 

served must be at least four months. 

Article 3(1) provides that extradition shall not be refused based 

on the nationality of the person sought, for any offense falling within a comprehensive list of 30 offenses. The list mirrors those offenses for which surrender of nationals by one member state of the 

European Union to another is mandatory under the European Arrest Warrant procedure. Under the Bulgarian Constitution, a treaty is required in order for Bulgarian authorities to surrender a Bulgarian citizen to another state for purposes of criminal prosecution. 

The United States is the first country outside the European Union 

with which Bulgaria has agreed to extradite nationals. 

Article 3(2) provides that the Requested State additionally may 

choose to extradite a national for an offense not enumerated in 

paragraph 1. In the event that the Requested State denies extradition on the sole basis of nationality with respect to an offense not 

enumerated in Article 3(1), under Article 3(3) the Requested State 

shall, at the request of the Requesting State, submit the case to its 

competent authorities for prosecution. Under Article 3(4), the Parties also may agree to expand the list in paragraph 1 at a future 

time. 

Article 4 governs political and military offenses as a basis for the 

denial of extradition. As is customary in extradition treaties, Article 4(1) provides that extradition shall not be granted if the offense 

for which extradition is requested constitutes a political offense. 

Article 4(2) specifies five categories of offenses that shall not be 

considered to be political offenses: 

(a) an offense for which both Parties have the obligation pursuant to a multilateral international agreement to extradite 

the person sought or to submit the case to their competent authorities for decision as to prosecution; 

(b) murder, manslaughter, malicious wounding, inflicting 

grievous bodily harm, assault with intent to cause serious 

physical injury, and serious sexual assault; 

(c) an offense involving kidnapping, abduction, or any form 

of unlawful detention, including the taking of a hostage; 

(d) placing, using, threatening to use, or possessing an explosive, incendiary, or destructive device capable of endangering 

life, causing substantial bodily harm, or causing substantial 

property damage; and 

(e) a conspiracy or attempt to commit, or participation in the 

commission of any of the offenses set forth in (a)–(d). 

Article 4(3) provides that, notwithstanding Article 4(2), extradition shall not be granted if the executive authority of the Requested State determines that the request was politically motivated. 

Article 4(4) provides that the executive authority of the Requested State may refuse extradition for offenses under military 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
VIII

law that are not offenses under ordinary criminal law. Desertion 

would be an example of such an offense. 

Article 5(1) precludes extradition of a person who has been convicted or discharged from proceedings with final and binding effect 

by the competent authorities in the Requested State for the offense 

for which extradition is requested. Article 5(1) adopts a similar formulation to the U.S.-Austria Extradition Treaty and clarifies that 

an acquittal for lack of jurisdiction, or a discharge for lack of jurisdiction, is not an obstacle to extradition. 

Article 5(2) prohibits the Requested State from denying extradition solely based on the existence of criminal jurisdiction in the 

Requested State. Article 5(2) also ensures that the Parties will 

apply their domestic law on prior prosecution to give full force and 

effect to Articles 1 and 3 of the Treaty. Bulgarian criminal law allows for jurisdiction in a wide range of situations, including situations where the accused is a Bulgarian national but committed the 

crime abroad. In addition, Bulgarian extradition law permits denial 

of extradition where the offense for which extradition is requested 

falls within the jurisdiction of Bulgarian courts. Given these provisions of Bulgarian domestic law, Article 5(2) provides important 

protections to ensure that U.S. extradition requests to Bulgaria will 

not be denied based on Bulgaria’s ability to assert criminal jurisdiction for the same offense for which extradition has been requested. 

Article 6 provides that extradition may be denied if prosecution 

of the offense or execution of the penalty is barred by lapse of time 

under the laws of the Requesting State. Acts that would interrupt 

or suspend the prescriptive period in the Requesting State are to 

be given effect by the Requested State. 

Article 7, which is taken from Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, concerns capital punishment. It provides that, 

when an offense for which extradition is sought is punishable by 

death under the laws in the Requesting State but not under the 

laws in the Requested State, the Requested State may grant extradition on the condition that the death penalty shall not be imposed 

on the person sought, or if for procedural reasons such condition 

cannot be complied with by the Requesting State, on condition that 

the death penalty, if imposed, shall not be carried out. If the Requesting State accepts extradition subject to such a condition, it 

must comply with the condition. 

Article 8 establishes extradition procedures and describes the 

documents required to support a request for extradition. Article 

8(1), which is taken from Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 

Agreement, provides that all requests for extradition must be submitted through the diplomatic channel, which shall include transmission through the channel specified in Article 11(4) of the Treaty. Article 8(2) specifies the documents, information, and legal texts 

that shall support all extradition requests. Article 8(3) provides 

that a request for the extradition of a person who is charged with 

an offense must also be supported by such information as would 

provide a reasonable basis to believe that the person sought committed the offense for which extradition is sought. Article 8(4) sets 

forth the items, in addition to those in paragraph 2, that must accompany a request for the extradition relating to a person who has 

been found guilty or been convicted of the offense for which extraVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:29 Mar 12, 2008 Jkt 069118 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD012.XXX TD012

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
IX

dition is sought. It further requires that a request for extradition 

of a person who has been convicted in absentia must also be supported by such information as would provide a reasonable basis to 

believe that the person sought committed the offense for which extradition is sought, as well as information regarding the circumstances under which the person was absent from the proceedings. Article 8(5), which is taken from Article 8 of the U.S.-EU 

Extradition Agreement, authorizes the Requested State to require 

the Requesting State to furnish additional information to support 

an extradition request, if the Requested State deems it necessary 

to fulfill the requirements of the Treaty. It specifies that such information may be requested and supplied directly between the United 

States Department of Justice and the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Bulgaria. 

Article 9, which is taken from Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, concerns admissibility of documents. It provides 

that documents bearing the certificate or seal of either the Ministry 

or Department of Justice or the foreign affairs Ministry or Department of the Requesting State shall be admissible in extradition 

proceedings in the Requested State without further certification. 

Article 10 provides that all documents submitted under the Treaty by the Requesting State shall be translated into the language of 

the Requested State, unless otherwise agreed. 

Article 11 sets forth procedures and describes the information 

that is required for the provisional arrest and detention of the person sought pending presentation of the formal extradition request 

and supporting documents. Article 11(1) provides for provisional arrest and sets forth procedures for transmission of a request for provisional arrest. Article 11(2) specifies the information that must accompany an application for provisional arrest. Article 11(3) requires the Requested State to notify the Requesting State of the 

disposition of the provisional arrest request and the reasons for any 

inability to proceed with the request. 

Article 11(4) provides that, if the Requested State has not received the request for extradition and supporting documents within 

sixty days of the date of provisional arrest, the person may be discharged. Consistent with Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 

Agreement, Article 11(4) provides an alternative channel for receipt 

of extradition requests applicable with respect to persons who have 

been provisionally arrested, namely, through transmission of the 

request to the Embassy of the Requested State in the Requesting 

State. Article 11(5) provides that the discharge of a person from 

custody pursuant to Article 11(4) does not prejudice the person’s 

subsequent re-arrest and extradition if the extradition request and 

supporting documents are delivered at a later date. 

Article 12 specifies the procedures governing a decision on the 

extradition request and the surrender of the person sought. It requires the Requested State to promptly notify the Requesting State 

of its decision regarding a request. If the request is denied in whole 

or in part, the Requested State must provide an explanation of the 

reasons for the denial and, upon request, copies of pertinent judicial decisions. If extradition is granted, the States shall agree on 

the time and place for the surrender of the person sought. If the 

person sought is not removed from the territory of the Requested 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
X

State within the time period prescribed by the law of that State, 

the person may be discharged from custody, and the Requested 

State, in its discretion, may subsequently refuse extradition for the 

same offense(s). 

Article 13 addresses temporary and deferred surrender. Under 

Article 13(1), if a person whose extradition is sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the Requested State, the 

Requested State may defer extradition proceedings until the proceedings have been concluded or the sentence has been served in 

the Requested State. Alternatively, the Requested State may conduct the extradition proceedings and, if extradition is authorized, 

may choose to temporarily surrender the person to the Requesting 

State for the purpose of prosecution. 

Consistent with Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, 

Article 13(2) provides that the Requesting State shall keep the person so surrendered in custody and shall return that person to the 

Requested State after the conclusion of the proceedings against 

that person, in accordance with conditions to be determined by mutual agreement of the States. Time spent in custody in the Requesting State pending prosecution there may be deducted from 

the time to be served in the Requested State. The return of the person to the Requested State shall not require further extradition 

procedures. 

Article 14, which is taken from Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, governs the situation in which the Requested 

State receives requests for the extradition or surrender of the same 

person from more than one State, either for the same offense or for 

different offenses. Under Article 14(1), in the event of requests by 

more than one State for the same person, the executive authority 

of the Requested State shall determine to which State, if any, it 

will surrender that person. Article 14(2) provides that, in the event 

that Bulgaria receives an extradition request from the United 

States and a request for surrender pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant for the same person, Bulgaria’s competent court of 

law, or such other authority as Bulgaria may designate, shall determine to which State, if any, it will surrender the person. 

Article 14(3) provides a non-exclusive list of factors to be considered by the Requested State in determining to which State to surrender a person who is sought by more than one State. 

Article 15 provides that the Requested State may, to the extent 

permitted under its law, seize and surrender to the Requesting 

State all items, including articles, documents, evidence, and proceeds, that are connected with the offense in respect of which extradition is granted. Such items may be surrendered even if the extradition cannot be carried out due to the death, disappearance, or 

escape of the person sought. The Requested State may condition 

the surrender of the items upon satisfactory assurances from the 

Requesting State that the property will be returned to the Requested State as soon as practicable. The Requested State may also 

defer the surrender of such items if they are needed as evidence 

in the Requested State. The rights of third parties in such items 

are to be respected in accordance with the laws of the Requested 

State. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XI

Article 16 sets forth the Rule of Specialty, which, subject to specific exceptions set forth in paragraph 3, prohibits a person extradited under the Treaty from being detained, tried, or punished in 

the Requesting State except for: 

(a) any offense for which extradition was granted, or a differently 

denominated offense based on the same facts as the offense for 

which extradition was granted, provided such offense is extraditable, or is a lesser included offense; 

(b) any offense committed after the extradition of the person; or 

(c) any offense for which the competent authority of the Requested State consents to the person’s detention, trial, or punishment. 

Article 16(2) provides that a person extradited under the Treaty 

may not be the subject of onward extradition or surrender for any 

offense committed prior to the extradition to the Requesting State 

unless the Requested State consents. This provision would preclude 

Bulgaria from transferring a fugitive surrendered to it by the 

United States to a third country or intemational tribunal without 

the consent of the United States. 

Article 16(3) sets forth exceptions to the rule of specialty. It provides that the restrictions set forth under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall 

not prevent the detention, trial, or punishment of an extradited 

person, or the extradition of a person to a third State, if the extradited person either leaves the territory of the Requesting State 

after extradition and voluntarily returns to it or fails to leave the 

territory of the Requesting State within twenty-five days of being 

free to do so. 

Consistent with Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, Article 17 provides for simplified procedures in situations 

where the person sought waives extradition or consents to being 

surrendered. The rule of specialty protections do not apply if a person waives extradition. If a person consents to surrender, the consent of the person sought may include agreement to waiver of protection of the rule of specialty. 

Article 18, which is taken from Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, governs the transit through the territory of one 

State of a person surrendered to the other State by a third country, 

or to a third country by the other State. 

Article 19 contains provisions regarding representation and the 

expenses associated with extradition. Specifically, the Requested 

State is required to advise, assist, appear in court on behalf of, and 

represent the interests of the Requesting State in any proceedings 

arising out of a request for extradition. Article 19(2) establishes 

that the Requested State bears all expenses incurred in that State 

in connection with the extradition proceedings, except that the Requesting State pays expenses related to the translation of extradition documents and the transportation of the person surrendered. 

Article 19(3) specifies that neither State shall make any pecuniary 

claim against the other arising out of the arrest, detention, examination, or surrender of persons under the Treaty. 

Article 20(1) provides that the U.S. Department of Justice and 

the Bulgarian Ministry of Justice may consult in connection with 

the processing of individual cases and in furtherance of efficient 

implementation of the Treaty. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XII

Article 20(2), which is taken from Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, provides for consultation between the Parties 

when the Requesting State contemplates the submission of particularly sensitive information in support of a request for extradition, 

in order to determine the extent to which the information can be 

protected by the Requested State in the event of submission. 

Article 21 makes the Treaty applicable to offenses committed 

both before and after the date it enters into force. 

Article 22 contains final clauses addressing the Treaty’s ratification and entry into force. It provides that the Treaty is subject to 

ratification and that the Treaty shall enter into force upon the date 

of the latter of the diplomatic notes by which the Parties notify 

each other that their internal legal requirements for the entering 

into force of the Treaty have been completed. Article 22(3) provides 

that, upon entry into force of the Treaty, the Treaty shall supersede the Treaty of Extradition between the United States of America and Bulgaria, signed at Sofia on March 19, 1924, as well as the 

Supplementary Extradition Treaty, signed at Washington on June 

8, 1934, and shall apply to all pending requests made under those 

prior treaties. 

Under Article 23, either State may terminate the Treaty with six 

months’ written notice to the other State through the diplomatic 

channel. 

The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in urging approval of this Treaty by the Senate at the earliest possible 

date. 

AGREEMENT ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE

IN CRIMINAL MATTERS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

OVERVIEW

The Agreement on Certain Aspects of Mutual Legal Assistance in 

Criminal Matters between the Government of the United States of 

America and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria (the 

‘‘MLA Agreement’’ or the ‘‘Agreement’’) serves to implement, as between the United States and Bulgaria, the provisions of the 2003 

Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance between the United States 

of America and the European Union (the ‘‘U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 

Assistance Agreement’’). Because the United States and Bulgaria 

do not have a bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, the MLA Agreement is a partial treaty governing only 

those issues regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 

Agreement. This approach is consistent to the one taken with the 

other EU member states (Denmark, Finland, Malta, Portugal, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia) with which the United States did not 

have an existing bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty. 

The following is a description of the provisions of the MLA 

Agreement and the accompanying Annex. 

The MLA Agreement 

Paragraph 1 of the Agreement specifies the articles of the U.S.- 

EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XIII

United States and Bulgaria. These provisions are set forth in detail 

in the Annex to the MLA Agreement. 

Paragraph 2 states that the Agreement shall not give rise to a 

right on the part of any private person to obtain, suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution of a request. 

Paragraph 3 provides that the Annex to the Agreement reflects 

the provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 

that shall apply between the United States and Bulgaria. 

In accordance with Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, paragraphs 4 and 5 make the Agreement 

applicable to offenses committed both before and after the date it 

enters into force. In accordance with Article 12(2) of the U.S.-EU 

Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Articles 3 and 4 of the Annex 

apply to requests pending at the time the Agreement enters into 

force. 

Paragraph 6 sets forth provisions on the entry into force and termination of the Agreement. The Agreement will enter into force 

after an exchange of instruments between the United States and 

Bulgaria indicating that they have completed their internal procedures for entry into force and on the date of entry into force of the 

U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. Should the U.S.-EU 

Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement be terminated, the Agreement 

will also be terminated, although the Parties may nevertheless 

agree to continue to apply some or all of its provisions. 

The Annex to the MLA Agreement 

Article 1 of the Annex incorporates Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Identification of bank information’’). 

Article 1(1) requires the Requested State, upon receiving a request, to promptly ascertain if banks located in its territory possess 

information on whether a natural or legal person suspected of or 

charged with a criminal offense as designated pursuant to Article 

1( 4), holds a bank account or accounts. Subsection (b) permits, but 

does not obligate, the Requested State to ascertain whether bank 

information exists pertaining to convicted persons, or whether 

there is information in the possession of non-bank financial institutions, or financial transactions other than those related to accounts. 

Article 1(2) requires a request for this form of cooperation to include, first, the identity of the natural or legal person relevant to 

locating such accounts or transactions; second, sufficient information to enable the competent authority of the Requested State to 

reasonably suspect that such person engaged in a criminal offense 

and that banks or non-bank financial institutions in the Requested 

State may have the information requested and to conclude that the 

information sought relates to the criminal investigation or proceeding for which assistance is sought; and, third, as much information as possible concerning which banks or other institutions 

may have the information, in order to reduce the breadth of the 

inquiry. 

Article 1(3) designates the U.S. channel of communication for requests for assistance under this article as the U.S. attache responsible for Bulgaria of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Federal 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XIV

Bureau of Investigation (depending on the nature of the investigation or proceeding giving rise to the request). For Bulgaria, the designated channel is the Supreme Cassation Prosecutors Office during pretrial and the Ministry of Justice during the trial. Article 1(3) 

also allows the United States and the European Union to modify 

these designations by exchange of diplomatic notes after the entry 

into force of the Agreement. 

Article 1(4) provides that the United States and Bulgaria will 

provide assistance under this article with respect to money laundering and terrorist activity punishable under the laws of both 

states, and with respect to such other criminal activity as to which 

they may notify each other. U.S. negotiators verified that under 

Bulgarian law, assistance will be available for a wide range of conduct associated with terrorism (which includes the conduct 

criminalized in international counter-terrorism conventions to 

which they are party) and money laundering with respect to an extremely broad range of predicate offenses. 

Article 1(5) establishes that assistance may not be refused under 

Article 1 on the grounds of bank secrecy. 

Article 1(6) provides that the Requested State shall respond to a 

request for production of the records concerning the accounts or 

transactions identified pursuant to this article in accordance with 

its domestic law. 

Article 2 of the Annex incorporates Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Joint investigative teams’’). 

Article 2(1) provides that joint investigative teams may be established and operated in the respective territories of the United 

States and Bulgaria, where the Parties agree to do so. 

Under Article 2(2), the manner of the team’s operation shall be 

agreed between the competent authorities, as determined by the respective States concerned. 

Article 2(3) describes channels of communication so as to facilitate direct communication between law enforcement authorities 

with respect to cases arising under Article 2. The paragraph provides that the competent authorities determined by the respective 

States concerned shall communicate directly for purposes of establishing and operating such teams, except where the complexity, 

scope or other circumstances involved are deemed to require more 

central coordination, in which case the States concerned may agree 

upon other channels of communication. This approach facilitates 

speed, efficiency and clarity by providing for direct communications 

in most cases among the affected law enforcement components, 

rather than through a mutual legal assistance request transmitted 

through a central authority, as would otherwise generally take 

place. 

Article 2(4) states that, where the joint investigative team needs 

investigative measures to be taken in one of the States involved in 

the team, a member of the team of that State may request its own 

competent authorities to take those measures without the other 

State having to submit a mutual legal assistance request. The legal 

standard for obtaining the measure is the applicable domestic 

standard. Thus, where an investigative measure is to be carried out 

in the United States, for example, a U.S. team member could do 

so by invoking existing domestic investigative authority, and would 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XV

share resulting information or evidence seized pursuant to such an 

action with the foreign authorities. A formal mutual legal assistance request would not be required. In a case in which there is no 

domestic U.S. jurisdiction and consequently a compulsory measure 

cannot be carried out based on domestic authority, the provisions 

of 28 U.S.C. Section 1782 may furnish a separate legal basis for 

carrying out such a measure. 

Article 3 of the Annex incorporates Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Video conferencing’’). 

Article 3(1) provides that the use of video transmission technology shall be available between the United States and Bulgaria 

for taking testimony in a proceeding for which mutual legal assistance is available. To the extent that procedures for video conferencing are not set forth in Article 3, the law of the Requested State 

governs the procedures. 

Article 3(2) provides that the costs associated with establishing 

and servicing the video transmission will be borne by the Requesting State, unless otherwise agreed. Other related costs will be 

borne as agreed upon by the United States and Bulgaria. 

Article 3(3) provides for a consultation mechanism in order to facilitate legal, technical or logistical issues that may arise in the 

execution of a particular request. 

Article 3(4) provides that the making of intentionally false statements or other witness or expert misconduct shall be punishable in 

the Requested State in the same manner as if such conduct had 

been committed in the course of a domestic proceeding. This is already the case where the United States has been requested to facilitate the taking of video testimony from a witness or expert located in the United States on behalf of a foreign State, since the 

proceeding to execute the request is a U.S. proceeding and therefore penalties under U.S. law for perjury, obstruction of justice or 

contempt of court are applicable. 

Article 3(5) specifies that the availability of video transmission 

technology for purposes of facilitating the taking of testimony does 

not mean that other means of obtaining testimony are no longer 

available. 

Article 3(6) makes clear that the Requested State may also permit the use of video conferencing technology for purposes other 

than providing testimony, including for purposes of identification of 

persons or objects, and taking of investigative statements (to the 

extent these are not considered to be testimony under the law of 

the Requesting State). 

Article 4 of the Annex incorporates Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Expedited transmission of requests’’). Article 4 provides that requests for mutual legal assistance, and communications related thereto, may be made by expedited means of communications, including fax or email, with formal 

confirmation to follow where required by the Requested State. The 

Requested State may respond to the request by any such expedited 

means of communication. 

Article 5 of the Annex incorporates Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Mutual legal assistance to administrative authorities’’). Article 5 provides an express legal basis 

for the provision of assistance to an administrative authority invesVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:29 Mar 12, 2008 Jkt 069118 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD012.XXX TD012

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XVI

tigating conduct with a view to criminal prosecution or referral to 

criminal investigation or prosecution authorities, pursuant to its 

specific administrative or regulatory authority to undertake such 

investigation. If the administrative authority anticipates that no 

prosecution or referral will take place, assistance is not available. 

Article 5(2) provides that requests for assistance under Article 5 

shall be transmitted between the U.S. Department of Justice and 

the Bulgarian Ministry of Justice or such other authorities as may 

be agreed upon by the U.S. Department of Justice and Bulgarian 

Ministry of Justice. 

Article 6 of the Annex incorporates Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Limitations on use to protect 

personal and other data’’). 

Article 6(1) permits the Requesting State to use evidence or information it has obtained from the Requested State for its criminal 

investigations and proceedings, for preventing an immediate and 

serious threat to its public security, for non-criminal judicial or administrative proceedings directly related to its criminal investigations or proceedings, for non-criminal judicial or administrative 

proceedings for which assistance was provided under Article 5 of 

the Annex, and for any other purpose if the information or evidence 

was made public within the framework of the proceedings for 

which it was transmitted or pursuant to the above permissible 

uses. Other uses of the evidence or information require the prior 

consent of the Requested State. 

Article 6(2)(a) specifies that the Article does not preclude the Requested State from imposing additional conditions where the particular request for assistance could not be granted in the absence 

of such conditions. Where such additional conditions are imposed, 

the Requested State may require the Requesting State to give information on the use made of the evidence or information. 

Article 6(2)(b) provides that generic restrictions with respect to 

the legal standards of the Requesting State for processing personal 

data may not be imposed by the Requested State as a condition 

under paragraph 2( a) to providing evidence or information. This 

provision is further elaborated upon in the explanatory note to the 

U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (regarding Article 

9(2)(b) of that Agreement), which specifies that the fact that the 

Requesting and Requested States have different systems of protecting the privacy of data does not give rise to a ground for refusal 

of assistance and may not as such give rise to additional conditions 

under Article 6(2)(a). Such refusal of assistance could only arise in 

exceptional cases in which, upon balancing the important interests 

involved in the particular case, furnishing the specific data sought 

by the Requesting State would raise difficulties so fundamental as 

to be considered by the Requested State to fall within the ‘‘essential interests’’ grounds for refusal contained in Article 8. 

Article 6(3) provides that where, following disclosure to the Requesting State, the Requested State becomes aware of circumstances that may cause it to seek additional conditions in a 

particular case, it may consult with the Requesting State to determine the extent to which the evidence or information can be protected. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
XVII

Article 7 of the Annex incorporates Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Requesting State’s request for 

confidentiality’’). Article 7 requires the Requested State, if asked, 

to use its best efforts to keep confidential a request and its contents, and to inform the Requesting State if the request cannot be 

executed without breaching confidentiality. 

Article 8 of the Annex incorporates Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (‘‘Non-derogation’’). Article 8 

makes clear that the provisions of the Annex do not preclude the 

assertion of a ground for refusal of assistance available to the Requested States pursuant to its applicable legal principles, including 

where execution of the request would prejudice its sovereignty, security, public order or other essential interests, except where such 

ground for refusal is precluded by Article 1(5) (bank secrecy) or 

6(2)(b) (generic restrictions relating to personal data) of the Annex. 

The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in urging approval of this Agreement by the Senate at the earliest possible date. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARING
(1) 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 73 TD12.001
2 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 74 TD12.002
3 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 75 TD12.003
4 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 76 TD12.004
5 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 77 TD12.005
6 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 78 TD12.006
7 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 79 TD12.007
8 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 80 TD12.008
9 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 81 TD12.009
10 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 82 TD12.010
11 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 83 TD12.011
12 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 84 TD12.012
13 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 85 TD12.013
14 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 86 TD12.014
15 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 87 TD12.015
16 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 88 TD12.016
17 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 89 TD12.017
18 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 90 TD12.018
19 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 91 TD12.019
20 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 92 TD12.020
21 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 93 TD12.021
22 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 94 TD12.022
23 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 95 TD12.023
24 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 96 TD12.024
25 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 97 TD12.025
26 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 98 TD12.026
27 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 99/110 TD12.027
28 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 46 here TD12.028