79–115 

115TH CONGRESS EXEC. REPT. " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–4 

TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

AND THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA ON EXTRADITION 

JUNE 7, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. CORKER, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany Treaty Doc. 115–1] 

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred the 

Treaty Between the United States of America and the Republic of 

Serbia on Extradition, signed at Belgrade on August 15, 2016 

(Treaty Doc. 115–1), having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon with one declaration and recommends that the Senate give 

its advice and consent to the ratification thereof as set forth in this 

report and the accompanying resolution of advice and consent to 

ratification. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose ........................................................................................................... 1 

II. Summary and Discussion of Key Provisions ............................................... 1 

III. Entry into Force and Termination ............................................................... 2 

IV. Committee Action .......................................................................................... 3 

V. Committee Comments ................................................................................... 3 

VI. Explanation of Extradition Treaty with Serbia .......................................... 3 

VII. Text of Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification .......................... 9 

I. PURPOSE

The purpose of the Extradition Treaty with the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter ‘‘the Treaty’’) is to impose mutual obligations to extradite fugitives at the request of a party subject to conditions set 

forth in the Treaty. 

II. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF KEY PROVISIONS

The United States is currently a party to over 100 bilateral extradition treaties, including a treaty with the Kingdom of Servia 

which was signed on October 25, 1901, and entered into force on 

June 12, 1902 (hereinafter the ‘‘1901 treaty’’). The 1901 treaty apFOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

2 

plies to the Republic of Serbia as a successor state to the former 

Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. 

The treaty before the Senate is designed to replace, and thereby 

modernize, the century-old extradition treaty with the Kingdom of 

Servia. It was signed in August 2016 and submitted to the Senate 

on January 17, 2017. In general, the Treaty follows a form used in 

several other bilateral extradition treaties approved by the Senate 

in recent years. It contains two important features which are not 

in the 1901 treaty. First, the Treaty contains a ‘‘dual criminality’’ 

provision, which requires a party to extradite a fugitive whenever 

the offense is punishable under the laws of both parties by deprivation of liberty for a maximum period of more than one year. This 

provision replaces the list of offenses specifically identified in the 

1901 treaty. This more flexible provision ensures that newly-enacted criminal offenses are covered by the Treaty, thereby obviating the need to amend it as offenses are criminalized by the Parties. 

Second, the Treaty provides for the extradition of nationals. Specifically, Article 3 states that ‘‘[e]xtradition shall not be refused 

based on the nationality of the person sought.’’ This contrasts with 

Article V of the 1901 treaty, which does not obligate a party to extradite its own citizens or subjects. Many countries have, historically, refused to extradite nationals. 

The Treaty contains another provision worth noting. Consistent 

with U.S. policy and practice in recent years, the Treaty narrows 

the political offense exception. The political offense exception (a 

long-standing exception in U.S. extradition practice) bars extradition of an individual for offenses of a ‘‘political’’ nature. The Treaty with Serbia retains the political offense exception in Article 4, 

but provides that certain crimes shall not be considered political offenses, including murder, serious sexual assault, kidnapping, and 

offenses for which both parties have an obligation to extradite 

under a multilateral agreement. 

The Treaty contains a provision related to the death penalty. 

Under Article 7, when extradition is sought for an offense punishable by death in the Requesting State and is not punishable by 

death in the Requested State, the Requested State may refuse extradition unless the Requesting State provides an assurance that 

the person sought for extradition will not be executed. This provision is found in many U.S. extradition treaties, as many treaty 

partners do not impose the death penalty under their laws, and object to its application to fugitives whom they extradite to the 

United States. 

Finally, the terms of Article 16 Rule of Specialty clearly bar onward extradition unless the Requested State consents to the onward extradition or surrender. 

III. ENTRY INTO FORCE AND TERMINATION

Under Article 22, the Treaty enters into force upon the exchange 

of the instruments of ratification. Under Article 23, either party 

may terminate the treaty on written notice; termination will be effective six months after the date of such notice. 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

3 

IV. COMMITTEE ACTION

The committee reviewed the Treaty at a hearing on December 

13, 2017, at which representatives of the Departments of State and 

Justice testified. The committee considered the Treaty on March 

20, 2018, and ordered it favorably reported by voice vote, with the 

recommendation that the Senate give its advice and consent to the 

ratification of the Treaty, subject to the declaration set forth in the 

resolution of advice and consent to ratification. 

V. COMMITTEE COMMENTS

The committee recommends favorably the Treaty with the Republic of Serbia. It modernizes a treaty that is over a century old, 

and provides a more flexible ‘‘dual criminality’’ provision which will 

incorporate a broader range of criminal offenses than is covered 

under the current treaty in place with the Republic of Serbia. 

VI. EXPLANATION OF EXTRADITION TREATY WITH SERBIA

What follows is a technical analysis of the Treaty prepared by 

the Departments of State and Justice. 

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF THE TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES

OF AMERICA AND THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA ON EXTRADITION

The Treaty Between the United States of America and the Republic of Serbia on Extradition (‘‘Treaty’’) replaces an outdated extradition treaty between the United States of America and the 

Kingdom of Servia signed in 1901. 

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

of the Treaty: 

Article 1—Obligation To Extradite 

Article 1 obligates each State to extradite to the other State persons sought by the Requesting State for prosecution or for imposition or service of a sentence for an extraditable offense. 

Article 2—Extraditable Offenses 

Article 2 defines extraditable offenses. Under Article 2(1), an offense is extraditable if it is punishable under the laws of both 

States by deprivation of liberty for a period of more than one year 

or by a more severe penalty. This formulation is consistent with 

the modern ‘‘dual criminality’’ approach. The new Treaty eliminates the requirement of the 1901 Treaty that the offense be 

among those listed in the Treaty. The dual criminality formulation 

also obviates the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as 

additional offenses become punishable under the laws of both 

States. It ensures comprehensive coverage of criminal conduct for 

which extradition may be sought. 

Article 2(2) is designed to include within the realm of extraditable offenses an attempt or conspiracy to commit, or participation in the commission of, offenses described in Article 2(1). By 

using the broad term ‘‘participation,’’ the Treaty covers such offenses as aiding, abetting, counseling, or procuring the commission 

of an offense, as well as being an accessory to an offense, at whatFOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

4 

ever stage of development of the criminal conduct and regardless 

of the alleged offender’s degree of involvement. 

Additionally, Article 2(3) identifies a number of situations in 

which an offense will be extraditable despite potential differences 

in the criminal laws of both States. For instance, an offense shall 

be extraditable whether or not the laws of the Requesting and Requested States place the acts constituting the offense within the 

same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology. This provision also makes explicit that an offense is extraditable even where the evidence provided does not support the 

existence of certain facts that are merely necessary to establish 

U.S. federal jurisdiction, such as evidence of interstate transportation or use of the mails or of other facilities affecting interstate 

or foreign commerce. This clarifies an important issue for the 

United States in requesting extradition for certain federal crimes. 

In addition, an offense involving tax fraud or tax evasion, customs 

duties, or import/export controls shall be extraditable regardless of 

whether the Requested State provides for the same sort of taxes, 

duties, or controls. 

Article 2(4) addresses issues of territorial jurisdiction. It specifies 

that where the Requesting State seeks extradition for an offense 

that occurred outside its territory, the Requested State shall grant 

extradition if the laws of the Requested State would provide for 

punishment of the extraterritorial offense in similar circumstances. 

If the Requested State’s laws would not provide for punishment of 

the extraterritorial offense in similar circumstances, the Requested 

State nonetheless retains discretion to grant extradition provided 

the other requirements of the Treaty are met. 

Article 2(5) prescribes that if extradition is granted for an extraditable offense, it shall also be granted for any other offense specified in the request even if the latter offense is punishable by a 

maximum of 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 

service of a sentence of imprisonment for an extraditable offense, 

the Requested State may only grant extradition if at least six 

months imprisonment remains to be served. 

Article 3—Nationality 

Article 3 establishes that extradition shall not be refused based 

on the nationality of the person sought. 

Article 4—Political and Military Offenses 

Article 4 establishes an exception for political and military offenses. Article 4(1) states generally that extradition shall not be 

granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense. 

Article 4(2), however, describes five categories of offenses that 

shall not be considered political offenses. A near identical list of 

these limitations was included in the extradition treaties between 

the United States and Chile (signed 2013), the United States and 

the Dominican Republic (signed 2015), and the United States and 

Kosovo (signed 2016). The list of limitations in each of these most 

recent treaties is slightly broader than similar lists that appear in 

other modern treaties, including those with Hungary (signed 1994), 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

5 

Poland (signed 1997), the United Kingdom (signed 2003), Bulgaria 

(signed 2007) and Romania (signed 2007). In addition to offenses 

that involve the possession, placement, use or threatened use of an 

explosive, incendiary, or destructive device when such device is capable of endangering life or causing substantial bodily harm or substantial property damage, Article 4(2)(d) now also establishes that 

political offenses cannot include offenses involving similarly serious 

biological, chemical or radiological agents. Further, Article 4(2)(e) 

makes clear that conspiracy or attempt to commit non-political offenses, or aiding or abetting another person who commits or attempts to commit such offenses, also shall not be considered political offenses. This slight narrowing of extraditable offenses to exclude political offenses aligns with a major priority of the United 

States to ensure that an overbroad definition of ‘‘political offense’’ 

does not impede the extradition of terrorists. 

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

Under Article 4(4), the competent authority of the Requested 

State may refuse extradition for offenses under military law that 

are not offenses under ordinary criminal law. Desertion would be 

an example of such an offense. 

Article 5—Non Bis In Idem 

Article 5(1) prohibits extradition in instances where a person 

sought has been previously convicted, acquitted, or discharged from 

proceedings with final and binding effect by the Requested State 

for the offense for which extradition is requested. Under Article 

5(2), however, a person shall not be considered to have been convicted, acquitted, or discharged in the Requested State when the 

authorities of the Requested State: (a) have decided not to prosecute the person sought for the acts for which extradition is requested, or (b) are still investigating or proceeding against the person sought for those acts. 

Article 6—Lapse of Time 

Article 6 provides that only the laws of the Requesting State regarding lapse of time may be considered for purposes of deciding 

whether or not to grant extradition. In this regard, the Requested 

State is bound by the statement of the Requesting State that the 

statute of limitations has not expired. 

Article 7—Death Penalty 

Article 7 addresses capital punishment. When an offense for 

which extradition is sought is punishable by death under the laws 

of the Requesting State but not under the laws of the Requested 

State, the Requested State may refuse extradition unless the Requesting State provides assurances that: (a) the death penalty shall 

not be imposed on the person sought, or (b) the death penalty, if 

imposed, shall not be carried out against the person sought. If either condition is satisfied, the Requested State must comply with 

the extradition request, and the Requesting State must abide by its 

assurances. 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

6 

Article 8—Extradition Procedures and Required Documents 

Article 8 specifies the procedures and documents required to support a request for extradition. Article 8(1) requires all extradition 

requests to be submitted through the diplomatic channel. Among 

several other requirements, Article 8(3)(c) establishes that extradition requests must be supported by information that would provide a sufficient basis to establish that it is probable that the person sought committed the offense(s) for which extradition is requested. Notably, this language is understood as equivalent to the 

probable cause standard applied in U.S. criminal law and applied 

by U.S. courts in determining whether to certify to the Secretary 

of State that a fugitive’s extradition would be lawful under the applicable treaty and U.S. law. Article 8(6) permits the submission of 

additional information to enable the Requested State to decide on 

the extradition request. Article 8(7) deals with circumstances 

where the Requesting State is considering submitting particularly 

sensitive information to support its request for extradition. In such 

a case, if the Requesting State is not satisfied that the Requested 

State can adequately protect the sensitive information, the Requesting State must determine whether the sensitive information 

should be submitted nonetheless. 

Article 9—Admissibility of Documents 

Article 9 sets out the procedures for the certification and admissibility of documents in extradition proceedings. 

Article 10—Translation 

Article 10 requires all documents submitted by the Requesting 

State under the Treaty to be accompanied by an official translation 

into the language of the Requested State, unless otherwise agreed. 

Article 11—Provisional Arrest 

Article 11 provides that, in cases of urgency, the Requesting 

State may request the provisional arrest of fugitives and sets forth 

the procedures for making such a request pending presentation of 

the formal extradition request. Article 11(2) specifies the information that must accompany a provisional arrest request. Article 

11(3) provides that the Requesting State shall be notified without 

delay of the date of a provisional arrest or the reasons why the Requested State cannot proceed with the request. Article 11(4) permits the release of the person provisionally arrested if the executive authority of the Requested State does not receive the formal 

extradition request and supporting documents within 60 days of 

the date on which the person was provisionally arrested. For the 

purposes of applying the 60-day time limitation, receipt of the supporting documents by the embassy of the Requested State located 

in the Requesting State constitutes receipt by the executive authority of the Requested State. Article 11(5) makes clear that the release of a person pursuant to Article 11(4) does not prevent the 

person’s re-arrest and extradition if the Requested State receives 

the formal extradition request and supporting documents at a later 

date. 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

7 

Article 12—Decision and Surrender 

Article 12 requires the Requested State to promptly notify the 

Requesting State of its decision regarding an extradition request. 

If the Requested State denies extradition, Article 12(2) requires the 

Requested State to explain the reasons for denial. If the Requested 

State agrees to grant extradition, Article 12(3) requires the Requested and Requesting States to coordinate the date and place for 

surrendering the person sought. Article 12(4) provides that if the 

person to be surrendered is not removed from the territory of the 

Requested State within the time prescribed by the Requested 

State’s laws, the Requested State may discharge the person sought 

from custody and subsequently refuse extradition for the same offense. 

Article 13—Deferral of Extradition Proceedings and Deferred or 

Temporary Surrender 

Article 13 addresses deferred extradition proceedings and deferred or temporary surrender of the person sought. Under Article 

13(1), if the person sought is being proceeded against in the Requested State, the Requested State may defer the extradition proceedings until its own proceedings have been concluded. Article 

13(2) addresses circumstances where extradition proceedings have 

concluded and extradition has been authorized, but the person 

sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the 

Requested State. In such cases, the Requested State may either 

defer the surrender of the person sought or temporarily surrender 

the person to the Requesting State for the purpose of prosecution. 

Article 13(3) explains that if the Requested State elects to defer 

surrender, it may detain the person sought until surrender. Under 

Article 13(4), however, if the Requested State elects to temporarily 

surrender the person to the Requesting State, the Requesting State 

must detain the temporarily surrendered person during proceedings and return the person when proceedings conclude. The 

person’s return to the Requested State shall not require any further extradition request or proceedings. 

Article 14—Conflicting Requests 

Pursuant to Article 14, if the Requested State receives extradition requests for the same person from the Requesting State and 

from any other State or States, either for the same offense or for 

different offenses, the executive authority of the Requested State 

shall determine to which State, if any, it will surrender that person. Article 14 requires the Requested State to consider several 

non-exclusive factors when making its decision. 

Article 15—Seizure and Surrender of Items 

Article 15 provides that, subject to certain conditions, the Requested State may seize and surrender to the Requesting State all 

items that are connected with the offense for which extradition is 

sought or that may be required as evidence in the Requesting 

State. 

Article 16—Rule of Specialty 

Article 16(1) sets forth the rule of specialty, which prohibits a 

person extradited under the Treaty from being detained, tried, or 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

8 

punished in the Requesting State, except where the detention, 

trial, or punishment: (a) is for an offense for which extradition was 

granted, or for a differently denominated offense carrying the same 

or lesser penalty that is 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) is for an offense committed after that person’s extradition to the Requesting State; or 

(c) occurs with the consent of the competent authority of the Requested State. If the Requested State consents to the person’s detention, trial or punishment for a different offense, the Requested 

State may require the Requesting State to submit the documentation required under Article 8. 

Similarly, 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 extradition, unless the 

Requested State consents. This provision would preclude the Republic of Serbia from transferring to a third State or an international tribunal a fugitive that the United States surrendered to 

the Republic of Serbia, unless the United States consents. Article 

16(3), however, permits the Requesting State to detain, try, punish, 

extradite, or surrender the same person if that person: (a) leaves 

and voluntarily returns to the Requesting State, or (b) chooses not 

to leave the Requesting State within 15 days of the day that person 

is free to leave. 

Article 17—Waiver and Simplified Extradition 

Article 17 allows the Requesting State to expedite the transfer of 

the person whose extradition is sought to the Requesting State. If 

the person consents to be surrendered to the Requesting State in 

writing, the Requested State may surrender the person as expeditiously as possible. While Serbian law provides for this consentbased expedited surrender, it does not permit a fugitive to waive 

the extradition process entirely. U.S. law and practice permit both 

consent to extradition and waiver of the extradition process, in the 

latter of which surrender may occur without further judicial or executive branch proceedings and the rule of specialty would not 

apply. 

Article 18—Transit 

Article 18 allows either State to authorize transportation through 

its territory of a person being extradited or otherwise transferred 

to the other State by a third State or from the other State to a 

third State for the purposes of prosecution, imposition of a sentence, or service of a sentence. It also specifies the procedures for 

requesting such transit and makes clear that a person who is being 

transported pursuant to this Article may be detained during the 

period of transit. Under Article 18(2), authorization is not required 

when the other State only uses air transportation and no landing 

is scheduled on the State’s territory. Should an unscheduled landing occur, however, the State may require submission of a formal 

transit request within 96 hours. 

Article 19—Representation and Expenses 

Article 19 requires the Requested State to advise, assist, appear 

in court on behalf of, and represent the interests of, the Requesting 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER

9 

State in any proceedings arising out of an extradition request. Additionally, the Requested State must bear all expenses incurred in 

that State in connection with the extradition proceedings, except 

for expenses related to translation of documents and transportation 

of the person surrendered. 

Article 20—Consultation 

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

Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Serbia may consult with each 

other directly in connection with individual cases and in furtherance of efficient implementation of the Treaty. 

Article 21—Application 

Article 21 establishes that the Treaty applies to offenses committed both before and after the date it enters into force. However, 

the Executive Authority of the Requested State retains the discretion to deny a request for extradition of its national, Article 3 notwithstanding, if the offense(s) for which extradition is sought were 

committed prior to January 1, 2005. 

Article 22—Ratification and Entry into Force 

Article 22 notes that the Treaty is subject to ratification and 

shall enter into force upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification. Article 22(3) provides that, upon entry into force, the Treaty will supersede the 1901 Treaty with respect to all requests submitted on or after the date of ratification and to all pending requests. 

Article 23—Termination 

Under Article 23, either State may terminate the Treaty by giving written notice to the other State through the diplomatic channel. The termination shall be effective six months after the date of 

such notice. 

VII. TEXT OF RESOLUTION OF ADVICE AND

CONSENT TO RATIFICATION

Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein), 

SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO A DECLARATION. 

The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the Treaty 

Between the United States of America and the Republic of Serbia 

on Extradition, signed at Belgrade on August 15, 2016 (Treaty Doc. 

115–1), subject to the declaration of section 2. 

SEC. 2. DECLARATION. 

The Senate’s advice and consent under section 1 is subject to the 

following declaration: The Treaty is self-executing. 

Æ 

FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER