Opinion ID: 708054
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Headquarters Agreement

Text: 75 The Headquarters Agreement provides for immunity from suit only in narrowly defined circumstances. First, service of legal process ... may take place within the headquarters district only with the consent of and under conditions approved by the Secretary-General. Id. Sec. 9(a). This provision is of no benefit to Karadzic, because he was not served within the well-defined confines of the headquarters district, which is bounded by Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive, 1st Avenue, 42nd Street, and 48th Street, see id. annex 1. Second, certain representatives of members of the United Nations, whether residing inside or outside of the headquarters district, shall be entitled to the same privileges and immunities as the United States extends to accredited diplomatic envoys. Id. Sec. 15. This provision is also of no benefit to Karadzic, since he is not a designated representative of any member of the United Nations. 76 A third provision of the Headquarters Agreement prohibits federal, state, and local authorities of the United States from impos[ing] any impediments to transit to or from the headquarters district of ... persons invited to the headquarters district by the United Nations ... on official business. Id. Sec. 11. Karadzic maintains that allowing service of process upon a United Nations invitee who is on official business would violate this section, presumably because it would impose a potential burden--exposure to suit--on the invitee's transit to and from the headquarters district. However, this Court has previously refused to extend the immunities provided by the Headquarters Agreement beyond those explicitly stated. See Klinghoffer v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro, 937 F.2d 44, 48 (2d Cir.1991). We therefore reject Karadzic's proposed construction of section 11, because it would effectively create an immunity from suit for United Nations invitees where none is provided by the express terms of the Headquarters Agreement. 9 77 The parties to the Headquarters Agreement agree with our construction of it. In response to a letter from plaintiffs' attorneys opposing any grant of immunity to Karadzic, a responsible State Department official wrote: Mr. Karadzic's status during his recent visits to the United States has been solely as an 'invitee' of the United Nations, and as such he enjoys no immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States. Letter from Michael J. Habib, Director of Eastern European Affairs, U.S. Dept. of State, to Beth Stephens (Mar. 24, 1993) (Habib Letter). Counsel for the United Nations has also issued an opinion stating that although the United States must allow United Nations invitees access to the Headquarters District, invitees are not immune from legal process while in the United States at locations outside of the Headquarters District. See In re Galvao, [1963] U.N.Jur.Y.B. 164 (opinion of U.N. legal counsel); see also Restatement (Third) Sec. 469 reporter's note 8 (U.N. invitee is not immune from suit or legal process outside the headquarters district during his sojourn in the United States).