U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

79–118

" ! SENATE 106TH CONGRESS

2d Session

TREATY DOC.

2000

106–38

EXTRADITION TREATY WITH BELIZE

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF

BELIZE, SIGNED AT BELIZE ON MARCH 30, 2000

JULY 27, 2000.—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

(III)

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

THE WHITE HOUSE, July 27, 2000.

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 Belize, signed at Belize on March 30, 2000.

In addition, I transmit, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. As the

report explains, the Treaty will not require implementing legislation.

The provisions in this Treaty follow generally the form and content of extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States.

The Treaty is one of a series of modern extradition treaties being

negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. Upon entry into force, the Treaty will replace

the outdated Extradition Treaty between the Government of the

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the

Government of the United States of America, signed at London,

June 8, 1972, entered into force on October 21, 1976, and made applicable to Belize on January 21 1977. That treaty continued in

force for Belize following independence. This Treaty will, upon

entry into force, enhance cooperation between the law enforcement

communities of the two countries. It will thereby make a significant contribution to international law enforcement efforts against

serious offenses, including terrorism, organized crime, and drugtrafficking offenses.

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.

(V)

LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 5, 2000.

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 Belize, signed at Belize on March

30, 2000. I recommend that the Treaty be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification.

The Treaty follows generally the form and content of extradition

treaties recently concluded by the United States. The Treaty will,

upon entry into force, enhance cooperation between the law enforcement communities of the United States and Belize in areas of

particular concern to the U.S. law enforcement community. The

Treaty will replace the Extradition Treaty between the United

States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and

Northern Ireland, signed at London, June 8, 1972, entered into

force October 21, 1976 and made applicable to Belize on January

21, 1977. This treaty continued in force for Belize following independence. The current treaty has become outmoded and the new

Treaty will provide significant improvements. For example, it will

establish the coverage of such key offenses as operating a continuing criminal enterprise, racketeering, money laundering and

firearms offenses. The new Treaty will not require any implementing legislation.

Article 1 obligates the Parties to extradite to each other, pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, persons sought for prosecution

or convicted of an extraditable offense by Requesting State authorities.

Article 2 concerns extraditable offenses. Article 2(1) defines an

extraditable offense as one that falls within any of the descriptions

listed in the Schedule annexed to the Treaty, or any other offense,

provided that in either case the offense 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 Schedule includes

40 of the most common extraditable offenses. Use of a ‘‘dual criminality’’ clause in addition to a list of offenses covered by the Treaty

obviates the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as additional offenses become punishable under the law of both States.

Article 2(2) defines an extraditable offense further as including

an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, aiding or abetting, counseling or procuring the commission of, or being an accessory before

or after the fact to, an extraditable offense.

VI

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

that an offense shall be an extraditable offense whether or not (a)

the laws in the two States place the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology;

or (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 merely for the purpose of establishing jurisdiction in a United States federal court.

With regard to offenses committed outside the territory of the

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

granted where the laws in the Requested State provide for the punishment of an offense committed outside its territory in similar circumstances.

Article 2(5) provides that if extradition is granted for an extraditable offense, it shall also be granted for other offenses specified

in the request that do not meet the minimum deprivation of liberty

requirement, provided that all other extradition requirements are

met.

Article 3 provides that extradition shall not be refused on the

ground of the nationality of the person sought. Although Belize as

a common-law country has no domestic legal bar to extraditing its

nationals, until 5 years ago it refused to do so. Article 3 would assure that Belize could not revert to this prior practice.

As is customary in extradition treaties, Article 4 incorporates a

political and military offense exception to the obligation to extradite. Article 4(1) states generally that extradition shall not be

granted for political offenses. Article 4(2) specifies three specific

categories of offenses that shall not be considered political offenses:

(a) a murder or other willful crime against a Head of State of one

of the States parties, or a member of such person’s family; (b) an

offense for which both States have the obligation pursuant to a

multilateral international agreement to extradite the person sought

or to submit the case to their respective competent authorities for

decision as to prosecution (e.g., the Convention for the Suppression

of Unlawful Seizures of Aircraft, done at the Hague on December

16, 1970, 22 UST 1641, TIAS 7192); and (c) a conspiracy or attempt

to commit any of the foregoing offenses, or aiding or abetting a person who commits or attempts to commit such offenses.

Article 4(3) further provides that notwithstanding the three exceptions in 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 extradition may be denied for offenses

under military law that are not offenses under ordinary criminal

law (for example, desertion).

Article 5 bars extradition when the person sought has been convicted or acquitted in the Requested State for the same offense, but

does not bar extradition if the authorities in the Requested State

have either declined to prosecute or have decided to discontinue

criminal proceedings against the person sought for the same offense for which extradition is requested.

Article 6 establishes the procedures and describes the documents

that are required to support a request for extradition. It requires

VII

that all requests be submitted through the diplomatic channel. Article 6(3) provides that, among other things, a request for the extradition of a person sought for prosecution must be supported by

such evidence as would be found sufficient, according to the law of

the Requested State, to justify committal for trial if the offense of

which the person has been accused had been committed in the Requested State.

Article 7 establishes the procedures under which documents submitted pursuant to Article 6 shall be received and admitted into

evidence in each State when it is the Requested State. These provisions are similar to those found in other modern extradition treaties.

Article 8 provides that extradition shall not be denied because of

the prescriptive laws (e.g., statute of limitations) of either State.

Article 9 sets forth procedures for the provisional arrest and detention of the person sought in cases of urgency, pending presentation of the formal request for extradition. Article 9(4) provides

that, if the Requested State’s executive authority has not received

the formal request for extradition and the supporting documents

required by Article 6 within sixty days from the date of provisional

arrest, the person may be discharged from custody. During that

time the person arrested must have access to the courts for such

remedies and recourses available under the Requested State’s laws.

Article 9(5) explicitly provides that the release of a person from

custody pursuant to Article 9(4) does not prejudice subsequent rearrest and extradition if the extradition request and supporting

documents are delivered at a later date.

Article 10 specifies the standard procedures governing the extradition decision and the surrender and return of persons sought. Article 10(1) provides that extradition shall be granted only if the evidence is sufficient under the law of the Requested State either to

justify the committal for trial of the person sought if the offense

had been committed in the Requested State or to prove that the

person is the identical person convicted by the Requesting State.

Article 10 further requires the Requested State to provide prompt

notice through the diplomatic channel to the Requesting State of

its decision on the request for extradition and to provide reasons

for any complete or partial denial of a request. If extradition is

granted, the relevant authorities of the States must agree on the

date and place for the surrender of the person sought. Article 10(5)

provides that if the person sought is not removed from the territory

of the Requested State within the time period prescribed by the

law of that State, the person may be discharged from custody; the

Requested State, in its discretion, may subsequently refuse extradition for the same offense.

Article 11 concerns temporary and deferred surrender. If a person whose extradition has been granted is being proceeded against

or is serving a sentence in the Requested State, the Requested

State may temporarily surrender the person to the Requesting

State for prosecution. The person so surrendered must be kept in

custody in the Requesting State and returned to the Requested

State after the conclusion of the proceedings against that person,

on conditions agreed between the States. Alternatively, the ReVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:36 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 079118 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD038.XXX pfrm02 PsN: TD038
VIII

quested State may postpone the extradition proceedings until its

prosecution has been concluded or the sentence has been served.

Article 12 again reflects the U.S. practice in modern extradition

treaties, setting forth a non-exclusive list of factors to be considered

by the Requested State in determining to which State to surrender

a person sought by more than one State.

Article 13 provides that if extradition is granted, the Requested

State may, to the extent permitted under its law, seize and surrender to the Requesting State all articles, documents, and evidence connected with the offense. Such items may be surrendered

even if the extradition cannot be carried out due to the death, disappearance, or escape of the person sought. Surrender of the property may be conditioned upon satisfactory assurances concerning

its return, or may be deferred if the property is needed as evidence

in the Requested State. Article 13(3) provides that any rights of

third parties in such property must be duly respected.

Article 14 sets forth the rule of specialty. It provides, subject to

specific exceptions, that a person extradited under the Treaty may

not be detained, tried or punished in the Requesting State for an

offense other than that for which extradition has been granted or

a differently denominated offense based on the same facts on which

extradition was granted (provided such offense is extraditable or is

a lesser included offense). Exceptions to the rule of specialty include an offense committed after the extradition of the person or

an offense for which a waiver of the rule of specialty is granted by

the executive authority of the Requested State. Similarly, the Requesting State may not extradite the person to a third state for an

offense committed prior to the original surrender unless the surrendering State consents. These restrictions do not apply if the person has left and voluntarily returned to the territory of the Requesting State or if the person has had an opportunity to leave the

territory of the Requesting State after extradition and has not done

so within ten days.

Article 15 permits surrender by the Requested State without further proceedings if the person sought consents to be surrendered.

Article 16 governs the transit through the territory of one State

of a person being surrendered to the other State by a third State.

Article 17 contains provisions on representation and expenses

that are similar to those found in other modern extradition treaties. Specifically, the Requested State must bear the expenses incurred and represent the interests of the Requesting State in any

proceedings arising out of a request for extradition. The Requesting

State must pay all expenses incurred in translation of extradition

documents and the transportation of the person surrendered.

Article 17(3) clarifies that neither State can make any pecuniary

claim against the other State arising out of the arrest, detention,

examination, or surrender of persons sought under the Treaty.

Article 18 provides that the Department of Justice of the United

States and the Attorney General of Belize may consult with each

other directly in connection with the processing of individual cases

and in furtherance of maintaining and improving procedures for

the implementation of the Treaty.

Article 19, like similar provisions in most recent U.S. extradition

treaties, states that the Treaty is applicable to offenses committed

IX

before as well as after the date the Treaty enters into force, provided that extradition shall not be granted for an offense committed before the Treaty enters into force which was not an offense

under the laws of both States at the time of its commission. The

Article also provides that nothing in the Treaty can be construed

to criminalize any conduct not subject to criminal sanctions at the

time it occurred.

Article 20 contains final clauses dealing with 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

exchange of instruments of ratification, which is to take place as

soon as possible. Article 20(3) provides that, upon entry into force

of this Treaty, the Extradition Treaty between the Government of

the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the

Government of the United States of America, signed at London

June 8, 1972, shall cease to have any effect between the United

States and Belize. Nevertheless, the Article notes that the Treaty

shall continue to apply to any extradition proceedings in which extradition documents have already been submitted to the courts of

the Requested State at the time the Treaty enters into force, except

that Article 14, addressing the rule of specialty, and Article 15,

providing for voluntary surrender, shall apply to persons found extraditable under the prior treaty.

Article 21 provides that either State may terminate the Treaty

by giving six months written notice to the other State.

A Technical Analysis explaining in detail the provisions of the

Treaty is being prepared by the United States negotiating delegation, consisting of representatives from the Departments of Justice

and State, and will be transmitted separately to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in favoring approval of this Treaty by the Senate at an early date.

Respectfully submitted,

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT.

(1)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16