Text - Treaty Document: Senate Consideration of Treaty Document 109-13All Information (Except Treaty Text)

A Senate treaty document provides the text of the treaty as transmitted to the Senate, as well as the transmittal letter from the President, the submittal letter from the Secretary of State, and accompanying papers.

Text of Treaty Document available as:

For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Senate Treaty Document 109-13]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]






109th Congress                                          Treaty Doc.
2d Session                     SENATE
                                                          109-13
_______________________________________________________________________


       MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION

                               ----------                              

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

   AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF 
    AMERICA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU), SIGNED ON JUNE 25, 2003 AT 
   WASHINGTON, TOGETHER WITH TWENTY-FIVE BILATERAL INSTRUMENTS WHICH 
 SUBSEQUENTLY WERE SIGNED BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND EACH EUROPEAN 
  UNION MEMBER STATE IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THE AGREEMENT WITH THE EU, 
                         WITH EXPLANATORY NOTE

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]




 September 28, 2006.--Agreement 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


(Star Print)











109th Congress                                              Treaty Doc.
 2d Session                      SENATE                       109-13
_______________________________________________________________________

 
       MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

   AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF 
    AMERICA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU), SIGNED ON JUNE 25, 2003 AT 
   WASHINGTON, TOGETHER WITH TWENTY-FIVE BILATERAL INSTRUMENTS WHICH 
 SUBSEQUENTLY WERE SIGNED BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND EACH EUROPEAN 
  UNION MEMBER STATE IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THE AGREEMENT WITH THE EU, 
                         WITH EXPLANATORY NOTE

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


 September 28, 2006.--Agreement 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


                              -----

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

49-118(STAR PRINT)         WASHINGTON : 2008













                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                               The White House, September 28, 2006.
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 Agreement on 
Mutual Legal Assistance between the United States of America 
and the European Union (EU), signed on June 25, 2003, at 
Washington, together with 25 bilateral instruments that 
subsequently were signed between the United States and each 
European Union Member State in order to implement the Agreement 
with the EU, and an explanatory note that is an integral part 
of the Agreement. I also transmit, for the information of the 
Senate, the report of the Department of State with respect to 
the Agreement and bilateral instruments.
    A parallel agreement with the European Union on 
extradition, together with bilateral instruments, will be 
transmitted to the Senate separately. These two agreements are 
the first law enforcement agreements concluded between the 
United States and the European Union. Together they serve to 
modernize and expand in important respects the law enforcement 
relationships between the United States and the 25 EU Member 
States, as well as formalize and strengthen the institutional 
framework for law enforcement relations between the United 
States and the European Union itself.
    The U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement contains 
several innovations that should prove of value to U.S. 
prosecutors and investigators, including in counterterrorism 
cases. The Agreement creates an improved mechanism for 
obtaining bank information from an EU Member State, elaborates 
legal frameworks for the use of new techniques such as joint 
investigative teams, and establishes a comprehensive and 
uniform framework for limitations on the use of personal and 
other data. The Agreement includes a non-derogation provision 
making clear that it is without prejudice to the ability of the 
United States or an EU Member State to refuse assistance where 
doing so would prejudice its sovereignty, security, public, or 
other essential interests.
    I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable 
consideration to the Agreement and bilateral instruments.

                                                    George W. Bush.
                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                       Department of State,
                                        Washington, August 3, 2006.
The President,
The White House.
    The President: I have the honor to submit to you, with a 
view to its transmittal to the Senate for advice and consent to 
ratification, the Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance between 
the United States and the European Union (EU), (``U.S.-EU 
MLAT''), signed on June 25, 2003. Also being submitted together 
with the U.S.-EU MLAT are twenty-five bilateral instruments 
that were signed by the United States and all EU Member States 
during 2004-2006, which implement the provisions of the U.S.-EU 
MLAT. A detailed, article-by-article analysis of the U.S.-EU 
MLAT is enclosed with this report. I am recommending that the 
U.S.-EU MLAT, including an explanatory note, which is an 
integral part of the Agreement, and the related bilateral 
instruments be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and 
consent to ratification. The Department joins me in this 
recommendation.
    Respectfully submitted.
                                                  Condoleezza Rice.
    Enclosures: As stated.

                           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement Between the United States and the 
                             European Union

    On June 25, 2003, the United States signed with the 
European Union a Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (``U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement''). Also being transmitted 
together with this Agreement are bilateral implementing 
instruments with all 25 EU member states. A parallel agreement 
with the EU on extradition, together with implementing 
instruments, is being transmitted separately. These are the 
first law enforcement agreements ever concluded by the United 
States with the European Union. The principal effect of the 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement would be to modernize 
bilateral relationships with EU member states with which the 
United States already has mutual legal assistance treaties 
(MLATs), and to create such relationships with the remainder of 
member states with which bilateral MLATs had not been concluded 
previously. This is particularly important in light of the 
counter-terrorism challenges we have faced since September 11, 
2001. A second benefit would be formalizing and strengthening 
the institutional framework for law enforcement relations with 
the European Union.
    The U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement incorporates 
several innovations which should prove of value to U.S. 
prosecutors and investigators. The Agreement creates an 
improved mechanism for obtaining bank information from an EU 
member state, elaborates legal frameworks for the use of new 
techniques such as joint investigative teams, and establishes a 
comprehensive and uniform framework for limitations on the use 
of personal and other data. The Agreement includes a non-
derogation provision making clear that it is without prejudice 
to the ability of the U.S. or an EU member state to refuse 
assistance where doing so would prejudice its sovereignty, 
security, other public or other essential interests.

               U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement


                                overview


    The U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement selectively 
amends and supplements existing United States bilateral mutual 
legal assistance treaties with seventeen Member States of the 
EU. In the case of the other eight EU Member States, the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement creates for the first time 
a treaty-based, albeit partial, mutual legal assistance 
relationship with the United States. A counterpart Agreement on 
Extradition between the United States and the European Union is 
being submitted separately, together with implementing 
instruments with EU Member States.
    Both U.S.-EU Agreements have their origin in a period of 
intensive consultation between the United States and officials 
of the European Union, and its then-Belgian and Spanish 
Presidencies, in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, 
terrorist attacks on ways of improving trans-Atlantic 
cooperation against terrorism. These discussions led to the 
conclusion that modernization of existing bilateral mutual 
legal assistance treaties (``MLATs'') between the United States 
and EU Member States would be a valuable step, as would 
creation of new bilateral mutual legal assistance agreements 
with Member States that did not already have such agreements 
with the United States. By concluding agreements with the 
European Union, the United States could achieve uniform 
improvements and expansions in coverage across much of Europe. 
In addition, the U.S.-EU Agreements will enable the 
strengthening of an emerging institutional relationship on law 
enforcement matters between the United States and the European 
Union, during a period when the EU is actively harmonizing 
national criminal law procedures and methods of international 
cooperation.
    Negotiation of the U.S.-EU Agreements was conducted during 
2002 and 2003. The European Union's delegation was led by 
officials from Denmark and Greece, which held the EU's rotating 
Presidency at that time, and also included officials from the 
Council and Commission. After the U.S.-EU Agreements were 
signed on June 25, 2003, the United States pursued negotiation 
with each Member State of implementing bilateral mutual legal 
assistance instruments. Initial efforts focused on the fifteen 
states that were members of the European Union at the time the 
U.S.-EU Agreements were signed, and then expanded to the 
additional ten states, which joined the EU in 2004. The last of 
the bilateral instruments was signed on June 9, 2006.
    The U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement and bilateral 
instruments are regarded as self-executing treaties under U.S. 
law, and thus will not require implementing legislation for the 
United States. With respect to implementation within the 
European Union, there is greater complexity. The EU, as a 
Contracting Party, is responsible for implementation of the 
obligations contained in the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, even though practical application of those 
obligations would occur at the Member State level. The EU 
Council would monitor implementation and empower the Presidency 
as necessary to ensure that Member States comply in all 
respects. EU Member States, while formally not Contracting 
Parties to the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement are 
bound to its provisions under internal EU law. The Member 
States also would have international obligations to the United 
States under the bilateral instruments. Most Member States, in 
order to comply with the requirements of their domestic 
constitutional order, are like the United States, pursuing 
domestic processes in order to ratify both the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement and the bilateral instrument. A 
number of Member States also secured domestic parliamentary 
endorsement of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
prior to its signature.
    The following is an article-by-article description of the 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Preamble underscores that cooperation between the 
United States and European Union Member States serves to 
protect democratic society and our common values, including the 
rights of individuals and the rule of law.
    Article 1 (``Object and Purpose'') states that the United 
States and the EU undertake to provide enhancements to 
cooperation and mutual legal assistance, in the manner 
specified in the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. To 
the extent that mutual legal assistance between the United 
States and EU Member States is carried out pursuant to 
bilateral treaties, this phrasing underscores the obligation to 
supplement, and, where necessary, modify these existing 
bilateral treaties to effectuate the terms of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Article 2 (``Definitions'') defines three terms used 
frequently in the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement: 
``Contracting Parties,'' ``Member States,'' and ``Ministry of 
Justice.''
    Article 2(1) provides that the Contracting Parties to each 
U.S.-EU Agreement are the United States and the European Union. 
Under Articles 24 and 38 of the Treaty of European Union, the 
European Union may enter into international agreements in the 
area of criminal judicial cooperation. The Member State then 
holding the rotating Presidency (Denmark, followed by Greece) 
leg negotiations for the European Union. At the conclusion of 
negotiations, Greece was authorized unanimously by the European 
Council to sign the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
on behalf of the European Union.
    Article 3(1) (``Scope of application'') provides that the 
Contracting Parties shall ensure that the provisions of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement are applied in 
relation to existing bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties 
between the United States and EU Member States. Thus the EU is 
responsible, as the Party to the Agreement, for ensuring that 
Member States make the necessary changes in their bilateral 
mutual legal assistance relationships with the United States.
    The remainder of Article 3(1) specifies the manner in which 
existing mutual legal assistance treaties between the United 
States and EU Member States are affected by the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement, or, alternatively, the manner in 
which the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement is to apply 
where there is no mutual legal assistance treaty in force 
between a Member State and the United States. Generally, 
Article 4 (creating a mechanism for identifying bank accounts 
and transactions), 5 (providing a mechanism for forming joint 
investigative teams), 6 (establishing a mechanism for using 
video conferencing technology in criminal investigations and 
proceedings), 7 (providing for the use of expedited means of 
communications) and 8 (authorizing the providing of mutual 
legal assistance to certain administrative authorities), which 
either create new cooperation mechanisms or deal with them in 
great detail than in existing treaties, supplement the terms of 
existing bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties, and also 
apply in the absence of a treaty. Article 9 (facilitating broad 
law enforcement use of information and evidence received 
pursuant to mutual legal assistance requests), replaces use 
limitation provisions in existing bilateral mutual legal 
assistance treaties, and is applicable where the bilateral 
mutual legal assistance treaty either contains no use 
limitation provisions (i.e. the U.S.-Belgium MLAT) or where 
there is no mutual legal assistance treaty in force. Article 10 
(providing a procedure for the requesting State to seek the 
confidentiality of its request) is applied bilaterally except 
if the applicable bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty 
already has such a provision.
    The extent to which current mutual legal assistance 
treaties with EU Member States are modified or supplemented by 
application of these substantive provisions is described later 
in this analysis, on a country-by-country basis.
    Article 3(2) elaborates on the EU's obligation to ensure 
the application of the provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement by its Member States having existing 
bilateral MLATs with the United States. Specifically, the EU 
shall ensure that each Member State acknowledges the 
consequential changes to its existing bilateral mutual legal 
assistance treaty by entering into a written ``instrument'' 
with the United States, that is, a free-standing international 
agreement binding under international law. The EU also must 
ensure that countries acceding to the European Union after the 
entry into force of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement and having mutual legal assistance treaties with the 
United States conclude bilateral instruments with the United 
States after accession or preferably prior thereto.
    Article 3(3) provides that both the United States and the 
European Union are obliged to ensure the application of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement by Member States 
lacking an existing bilateral MLAT with the United States. Such 
a Member State also must enter into a written ``instrument'' 
with the United States. Countries acceding to the European 
Union after the entry into force of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement and not having mutual legal assistance 
treaties with the United States likewise are obliged to 
conclude bilateral instruments with the United States after 
accession, and are encouraged to do so prior to their 
accession.
    Article 3(4) states that the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement shall apply in mutual legal assistance 
relations between the United States and a new Member State from 
the date of notification that internal procedures for the 
bilateral instrument have been completed.
    There are both legal and practical reasons for the 
requirement of a bilateral instrument between the United States 
and each EU Member State. As a matter of international law, the 
conclusion of a bilateral instrument conveys to the United 
States the sovereign consent of the Member State to the changes 
required in treaties concluded and applied at the bilateral 
level, rather than relying entirely on the effect of EU 
internal law to ensure application of changes in bilateral 
treaties to which the European Union itself is not party.
    In addition, as a practical matter, since mutual legal 
assistance treaties are litigated and interpreted extensively 
in national courts, it was seen as important to delineate in 
instruments concluded at the bilateral level the changes made 
by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement in these 
bilateral treaties. The consequential changes are set out 
either in a revised integrated text of the particular treaty 
(included as an Annex to the instrument) or in provisions 
placed in the instrument itself specifically delineating the 
new operative language. Conclusion of bilateral instruments 
thus serves to ease application of the revised treaties for 
practitioners and the judiciary.
    Finally, Article 3(5), like other U.S. mutual legal 
assistance treaties, states that the provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement are intended solely for 
mutual legal assistance between the United States and EU Member 
States and shall not give rise to a right on the part of any 
private person to obtain, suppress, or exclude evidence, impede 
the execution of a request, or expand or limit rights otherwise 
available under domestic law.
    Article 4 (``Identification of bank information'') is one 
of the provisions included in order to provide a form of 
assistance not specifically set forth in existing mutual legal 
assistance treaties. Its terms supplement the provisions of all 
existing treaties with EU Member States, and apply in the 
absence of a treaty.
    Mutual legal assistance treaties generally address the 
production of records located in the requested State. For such 
provisions to function properly with respect to bank and other 
business records, a requesting State must provide sufficient 
information regarding the bank branch or account involved to 
enable the records to be located and produced. In the Protocol 
to the European Union Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, which 
applies among EU Member States, Article 1 went a step further 
by establishing a procedure by which a requested State is 
obligated to search on a centralized basis for bank accounts 
located within its territory that may be important to a 
criminal investigation in the requesting State. Section 314(a) 
of the USA Patriot Act established a comparable centralized 
mechanism by which the Treasury Department's Financial Crime 
Information Center (``FinCen'') can query domestic banking 
institutions in order to locate transactions or accounts that 
may be involved in money laundering or terrorism violations. 
The availability of these existing comparable mechanisms 
provided a basis for Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement.
    Article 4(1)(a) requires the requested State, upon 
receiving a request in accordance with the terms of the 
article, 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 paragraph 4, holds a bank account or 
accounts. Paragraph 1(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 4(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 4(3) provides that request and information may be 
transmitted through, for the United States, designated law 
enforcement components and, for the European Union, designated 
law enforcement authorities of the Member States, or their 
Central Authorities under bilateral mutual legal assistance 
treaties. In each of the bilateral instruments with the 25 EU 
Member States implementing the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, the United States designated its legal attache to 
the Member State concerned representing the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration or Immigration 
and Customs Enforcement (depending on the nature of the 
investigation or proceeding giving rise to the request), as the 
channel of communication under this article, since this was 
viewed as the most rapid channel for the exchange of 
information which may be time-sensitive. Paragraph 3 also 
allows the United States and the EU to modify these 
designations by exchange of diplomatic notes after the entry 
into force of this agreement.
    Under Article 4 paragraph 4(a), a State may limit its 
obligation to provide assistance under this Article to certain 
forms of criminality, specifically: (i) offenses punishable 
under the laws of the requesting and requested States (i.e., 
conduct as to which there is dual criminality standard); (ii) 
offenses punishable by a maximum penalty of at least two years 
in the requested State and four years in the requesting State 
(i.e., a modified application of the dual criminality 
standard); or (iii) designated offenses punishable under the 
laws of the requesting and requested States. A State may also 
make application of Article 4 unlimited in scope (i.e., no dual 
criminality requirement).
    Under paragraph 4(b), should a State choose to limit the 
scope of its obligation to provide assistance under the options 
set forth in paragraphs 4(a)(ii) or (iii), it must at a minimum 
provide assistance with respect to terrorist activity and 
laundering of proceeds generated from a comprehensive range of 
serious criminal activities punishable under the laws of both 
the requesting and requested States. In the bilateral 
instruments between the United States and EU Member States 
implementing the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, the 
United States, consistent with the scope of Section 314(a) of 
the USA Patriot Act, chose to limit application of this measure 
to terrorist and money laundering activity punishable in both 
the requesting and requested States, and to such criminal 
activity as may subsequently be agreed between the Parties (so 
that the scope of assistance could be expanded in the future in 
a manner corresponding to any future expansion of U.S. domestic 
legislation). Most EU Member States, in turn, chose also to 
provide assistance to the same extent, but, as will be 
described in the country-by-country analysis of bilateral 
instruments that follows, a number agreed to provide assistance 
under this Article more broadly. Those EU Member States that 
chose to provide assistance to the same extent as the United 
States assured the United States that assistance would be 
available with respect to 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. The U.S. negotiators in turn 
provided the same assurance.
    Article 4(5) prohibits the invocation of bank secrecy in 
order to refuse assistance under this Article. Strictly 
speaking, this specification does not alter the applicable 
standard where there is a mutual legal assistance treaty in 
force between an EU Member State and the United States, since 
no U.S. MLAT permits the assertion of bank secrecy as a ground 
for refusal of assistance. However, with respect to EU Member 
States with which the United States does not have a mutual 
legal assistance treaty, this paragraph prohibits the EU Member 
State from seeking to deny assistance on this basis.
    Article 4(6) provides that once information has been 
provided under this Article identifying accounts or 
transactions, the actual production of records pertaining to 
such accounts or transactions is governed by the already 
existing MLAT provision governing the production of records, 
or, in the absence of an MLAT, by the applicable domestic law 
of the requested State. The same would of course be true with 
respect to the freezing or forfeiture of funds identified 
through application of this Article.
    Under Article 4(7), the United States and EU are under an 
obligation to ensure that application of this Article does not 
impose extraordinary burdens on requested States. In the event 
that the volume of requests became overly burdensome to banks 
or the points of contact designated under paragraph 3, a 
consultation mechanism has been established for purposes of 
facilitating a more effective application of the Article, 
including such measures as may be required to reduce pending 
and future burdens.
    Article 5 (``Joint investigative teams'') also provides a 
form of cooperation not explicitly provided for in existing 
United States bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties, and 
its terms supplement the provisions of existing treaties and 
apply in the absence of a treaty. Paragraph 1 requires the 
Parties to provide for the necessary legal authority to 
establish and operate joint investigative teams in the 
respective territories of the United States and the EU Member 
States, where the States concerned agree to do so. For the 
United States, the legal authority to engage in such 
cooperation with foreign authorities already exists under the 
statutory and regulatory frameworks for U.S. law enforcement 
agencies. For some EU Member States, however, an obligation to 
assist set forth in a binding legal instrument was deemed 
necessary to permit operation of joint teams in a broad variety 
of circumstances, such as a joint team similar in complexity to 
a U.S. domestic law enforcement task force, in which both 
police and prosecutorial components (or the investigative 
magistrate that in some EU countries performs this function) 
participate simultaneously.
    Under Article 5(2), the manner of the team's operation 
shall be agreed between the competent authorities determined by 
the respective States concerned.
    Article 5(3) describes channels of communication. The 
competent authorities determined by the respective States 
concerned shall communicate directly for purposes of 
establishment and operation of such team, 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 the Central 
Authority, as would otherwise take place pursuant to a 
bilateral MLAT.
    Article 5(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. In other words, 
where an investigative measure is to be carried out in the 
United States, for example, a U.S. team member would do so by 
invoking existing domestic investigative authority, and would 
share resulting information or evidence seized pursuant to 
existing authority to share with foreign authorities. An MLAT 
request would not be required. Of course, 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 other provisions of the bilateral MLAT in force 
(or, absent an MLAT, the provisions of 28 U.S.C. Section 1782 
or other provisions) may furnish a separate legal basis for 
carrying out such measure.
    Article 6 (``Video-conferencing'') also supplements the 
terms of existing bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties 
and applies in the absence of a treaty. Paragraph 1 requires 
the Parties to provide for the necessary legal authority to use 
video transmission technology between the United States and the 
EU Member States for the purpose of taking witness testimony 
sought by the requesting State. The procedures to be applied in 
taking such testimony are as otherwise set forth in the 
applicable mutual legal assistance treaty in force (e.g., 
provisions governing execution of requests, or procedures for 
taking of testimony in the requested State), or--either in the 
absence of a treaty or where the terms of the treaty so 
provide--under the law of the requested State. Here too, 
general provisions of bilateral MLATs already in force and 28 
U.S.C. Section 1782 already enable the United States to provide 
this form of cooperation on behalf of a foreign State, but a 
separate provision was deemed useful to enable a number of EU 
Member States to provide the same cooperation to the United 
States.
    Article 6(2) deals with costs. Unless otherwise agreed, the 
requesting State shall bear the cost associated with 
establishing and servicing the transmission. Other costs are 
treated in accordance with the costs provision of the 
applicable MLAT in force, or, absent an MLAT, as agreed between 
the requesting and requested States.
    Article 6(3) provides for a consultation mechanism in order 
to facilitate legal, technical or logistical issues that may 
arise in a particular State.
    Article 6(4) provides that the making of intentionally 
false statements or other witness or expert misconduct shall be 
punishable 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 6(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 applicable.
    Article 6(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 7 (``Expedited transmission of requests'') 
supplements the terms of existing mutual legal assistance 
treaties in force and applies in the absence of a treaty. It 
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. Use of these means of 
transmitting or responding to requests is at the option of the 
State concerned, and generally will facilitate the rapid 
execution of requests.
    Article 8 (``Mutual legal assistance to administrative 
authorities'') also supplements the terms of existing treaties, 
and applies in the absence thereof. Paragraph 1 provides an 
express legal basis for providing assistance to an 
administrative authority investigating conduct with a view to 
criminal prosecution of the conduct or referral of the conduct 
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 under this agreement.
    This provision benefits U.S. regulatory authorities 
including, but not limited to, the Securities and Exchange 
Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and the 
Federal Trade Commission, which have statutory authority to 
conduct investigations with a view to subsequent referral to 
the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. By the 
terms of Article 8(1), there is an obligation to afford 
assistance to these ``national'' (i.e., federal) authorities. 
With respect to assistance to ``other'' administrative 
authorities (i.e., at the state or local level), the requested 
State may provide assistance at its discretion. These 
obligations are described in more detail in the explanatory 
note to the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, which 
also clarifies that there is an obligation to assist 
irrespective of the fact that the administrative or regulatory 
authority is also pursuing sanctions other than possible 
referral for criminal prosecution, and irrespective of whether 
or not the authority ultimately decides to pursue criminal 
prosecution referral.
    Pursuant to Article 8(2)(a), requests are to be transmitted 
between the Central Authorities pursuant to the applicable 
mutual legal assistance treaty in force, or between such other 
authorities as may be agreed among the Central Authorities. In 
the absence of a mutual legal assistance treaty, paragraph 2(b) 
specifies that such requests are to be transmitted between the 
U.S. Department of Justice and the Ministry of Justice of the 
EU Member State (or its comparable ministry where designated 
pursuant to Article 15(1)), or between such other authorities 
as may be agreed between the Department of Justice and such 
Ministry. Pursuant to paragraph 3, the United States and EU are 
under an obligation to ensure that application of this Article 
does not impose extraordinary burdens on requested States. 
Should this occur, a consultation mechanism has been 
established for purposes of facilitating more effective 
application of the Article, including such measures as may be 
required to reduce pending and future burdens.
    Article 9 (``Limitations on use to protect personal and 
other date'') replaces the use limitation provision of existing 
bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties (subject to 
paragraphs 4 and 5, described further below). It also applies 
where the existing treaty has no use limitation article (i.e. 
the U.S.-Belgium treaty), as well as where there is no treaty 
in force.
    Article 9(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, for non-criminal 
judicial or administrative proceedings for which assistance was 
provided under Article 8, 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. 
This paragraph represents a broader formulation than in pre-
existing MLATs that require the consent from the requested 
State if the evidence or information is to be used for an 
investigation or proceeding different from that set forth in 
the request. The new formulation authorizes the use of the 
evidence and information received for a particular case in 
other criminal cases and for preventive purposes.
    Article 9(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 9(2)(b) provides that generic restrictions with 
respect to the legal standards in 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 is further elaborated upon in the 
explanatory note to the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
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 paragraph 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.
    Article 9(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.
    Article 9(4) provides that the requested State instead may 
apply the use limitation provision of the existing mutual legal 
assistance treaty where to do so will result in less 
restriction on the use of evidence of information than provided 
for in this Article. This paragraph applies to those mutual 
legal assistance treaties between the United States and EU 
Member States in which there is no use limitation unless 
specifically invoked by the requested State. In such cases, the 
requested State remains free to impose no limitation, and the 
use limitation article in the relevant bilateral instruments 
between the United States and such EU Member States has been 
drafted accordingly.
    Article 9(5) provides that, where the bilateral mutual 
legal assistance treaty in force between the United States and 
an EU Member State on the date of signature of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement limits the obligation to 
provide assistance with respect to certain tax offenses, the 
Member State concerned may indicate in its written instrument 
with the United States that, with respect to such offenses, it 
will continue to apply the pre-existing bilateral provision. 
Only Luxembourg has made use of this provision, so that with 
respect to tax offenses as to which the obligation to provide 
assistance is limited by the U.S.-Luxembourg MLAT, the prior 
use limitation provision applies.
    Article 10 (``Requesting State's request for 
confidentiality''), like similar provisions in many modern U.S. 
MLATs, 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. The article applies where 
the existing mutual legal assistance treaty does not already 
contain such a provision, or in the absence of a treaty.
    Under Article 11 (``Consultations''), the United States and 
European Union shall consult for purposes of enabling the most 
effective use of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Article 12 (``Temporal application'') provides that the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applies to offenses 
committed before as well as after it enters into force. 
Articles 6 (``Video-conferencing'') and 7 (``Expedited 
transmission of requests'') apply to requests pending in a 
requested State at the time of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement's entry into force; otherwise the 
Agreement applies to requests for mutual legal assistance made 
after its entry into force.
    Article 13 (``Non-derogation'') makes clear that the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement's provisions do not 
preclude the assertion of a ground for refusal set forth in the 
applicable mutual legal assistance treaty, or, in the absence 
of a treaty, applicable legal principles (sovereignty, 
security, ordre public or other essential interests) except 
where such ground for refusal is precluded by Articles 4(5) 
(bank secrecy) and 9(2)(b) (generic restrictions relating to 
personal data) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement.
    Article 14 (``Future bilateral mutual legal assistance 
treaties with Member States'') provides that the United States 
and EU Member States may conclude future mutual legal 
assistance agreements consistent with the U.S.-EU Mutual legal 
Assistance Agreement. In the Explanatory Note, it is clarified 
that should measures set forth in the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement create operational difficulties for the 
United States or a Member State, and consultations alone cannot 
remedy the difficulty, a future bilateral agreement with the 
Member State could contain an operationally feasible 
alternative mechanism that satisfies the objectives of the 
provision in question.
    Article 15 (``Designation and notification'') provides that 
the EU shall notify the United States of designations pursuant 
to Articles 4(3) (points of contact for identification of bank 
information), 4(4) (designation of scope of bank information 
article) and 8(2) (competent authority other than Ministry of 
Justice designated as point of contact for cooperation with 
administrative authorities), prior to the completion of 
bilateral written instruments between the U.S. and Member 
States under Articles 3(2) or 3(3). This notification 
requirement was intended to ensure that the identity of these 
authorities would be set forth in the bilateral instruments.
    Under Article 16(1) (``Territorial application''), the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applies to the United 
States of America, to EU Member States, to territories for 
whose external relations a Member State is is responsible, and 
to countries for whom the member has other duties pertaining to 
their external relations, where agreed upon by exchange of 
diplomatic note between the EU and United States, duly 
confirmed by the relevant Member State. Several EU Member 
States have such responsibilities; hence, this enables the 
United States and EU to agree to include such territories or 
countries within the ambit of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement. Under paragraph 2, application of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement to such territories 
or countries may be terminated upon six month's written notice 
through the diplomatic channel, again where confirmed between 
the United States and the Member State concerned.
    Article 17 (``Review'') provides that the United States and 
the EU will carry out a common review of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement no later than five years after its 
entry into force, in particular for purposes of addressing its 
practical implementation and the consequences of the further 
development of the European Union in relation to the subject 
matter of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Article 18(1) (``Entry into force and termination''), 
provides that the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
shall enter into force on the first day following the third 
month after the date on which the United States and the EU have 
indicated that they have completed their internal procedures 
for this purpose. The exchange of instruments of ratification 
between the United States and the European Union shall also 
indicate that the bilateral instruments between the United 
States and all EU Member States have been completed. Article 
18(2) provides that either the United States or EU may 
terminate the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement by 
giving written notice to the other, with such termination 
effective six months after the date of such notice.
Bilateral Instruments between the United States and the EU Member 
        States implementing the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
        Agreement
    As noted above, Article 3(2) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement requires the conclusion of a written 
instrument between the United States and each Member State, 
indicating the application of Agreement's provisions in the 
bilateral mutual legal assistance relationship. The following 
discussion delineates the content and character of each of 
these instruments, and any particular understandings reached 
between the United States and individual Member States during 
the course of negotiations.
    The title chosen for the ``written instrument'' required by 
Article 3(2) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
varies among the Member States. Most Member States preferred to 
retain the term ``Instrument'' as used in the U.S.-EU 
Agreement, but others preferred more specific descriptions 
utilized under their national law that also are consistent with 
the binding character of the instrument under international 
law. Thus, instruments with several Member States (e.g. Germany 
and the Czech Republic) are termed supplementary treaties, to 
indicate their precise function and legal character in relation 
to existing treaties, while other Member States (e.g. Austria 
and Greece) preferred the similar term ``protocol.'' Still 
others chose the more general ``Agreement;'' (e.g. Netherlands 
and Poland).
    Each instrument first expresses the agreement of the 
Parties to apply the provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement under the terms laid out in Article 3. The 
new textual provisions to be applied are either specified 
verbatim in the instrument, or set out in an annex containing a 
revised consolidated text. The United States regarded the annex 
form as preferable from the perspective of U.S. courts and 
practitioners called upon to interpret a particular mutual 
assistance treaty with a Member State. A majority of Member 
States agreed.
    Other Member States, however, opted for non-integrated 
texts, in which only the newly-operative supplemental or 
replacement language is set forth, and in the instrument itself 
rather than in a separate annex. These Member States regarded 
inclusion of a consolidated text as not permitted by their 
domestic law. The consequence of the non-integrated approach is 
only that reference to both the instrument and the pre-existing 
treaty is necessary in order to apply the entire set of 
obligations between the United States and the Member State.
    Each instrument, for reasons of clarity, also recites the 
provision on temporal application from the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement, stating that the instrument applies to 
offenses committed before as well as after it enters into 
force, but, in general, does not apply to requests made prior 
to its entry into force.
    Instruments with several Member States required 
specification as to their geographic scope. These states--
Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom--exercise 
foreign relations responsibilities for territories or 
independent countries, including applying the European state's 
law enforcement treaties on their behalf. However, since the 
geographic scope of the European Union for purposes of criminal 
justice cooperation does not necessarily extend to all these 
territories and countries, the provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement would not apply to them unless 
specifically stipulated. Consequently, the relevant bilateral 
instruments spell out whether mutual legal assistance relations 
with the United States in respect of these territories and 
countries would continue to be governed by the pre-existing 
treaties in unmodified form.
    Each bilateral instrument also contains a provision on 
entry into force and termination. Entry into force of each 
instrument occurs on the date of entry into force of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, after exchange of 
notifications. Eighteen Member States will ratify both the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement and the bilateral 
instrument, since they serve to amend bilateral treaties which 
previously also were ratified. Four Member States regard formal 
ratification of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
as unnecessary under their domestic constitutional order, 
however, as authority in this respect has been deemed to have 
been granted to the EU, but will ratify the implementing 
bilateral instruments. Three Member States viewed it as 
unnecessary to ratify even the bilateral instrument.
    Finally, in the event of termination of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement--a step that would take place 
between the Parties to this Agreement--the bilateral 
instruments also shall terminate. Thereupon application of the 
pre-existing bilateral treaties, which are regarded as 
suspended while the bilateral instruments are in force, would 
resume. The United States and the Member States could, however, 
agree bilaterally to continue to apply some or all of the 
provisions in the bilateral instrument derived from the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
Austria
    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Austria was signed on July 20, 2005, and is entitled a protocol 
to the 1995 U.S.-Austria Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty. 
Articles 1-7 of the bilateral protocol incorporate the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement provisions into the 1995 MLAT 
as follows: Articles 4(1)-(5) (identification of bank 
information), 5 (joint investigative teams), and 6(1), (3)-(6) 
(video) conferencing) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement are added as Articles 18-20, with the existing 
Articles 18-20 being renumbered accordingly; Article 6(2) of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (cost of video-
conference) is added as the final sentence of Article 6 of the 
bilateral treaty (costs); Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
4(1); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (channel for transmission of requests by 
administrative or regulatory authorities) is added as the final 
sentence of Article 2(2), which already provided for the power 
to make such requests required by U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement in Article 8(1); and Article 9(1)-(3) of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) 
replaces the majority of Article 7. The final two articles of 
the bilateral protocol reflect the provisions of Articles 12 
(temporal application) and 18 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 4 of the 
bilateral protocol (identification of bank information) 
specifies that Austria's point of contact for the exchange of 
bank information under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, 
and that, like the United States, Austria 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 Austria may 
notify the United States.
Belgium
    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Belgium was signed on December 16, 2004. Paragraph 1 of the 
bilateral instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the United 
States and Belgium as well as certain clarifications and 
designations concerning the Annex to the instrument. Paragraph 
2 provides that the Annex reflects the integrated text that 
shall apply between the United States and Belgium. Paragraphs 
3-5 contain rules on temporal application, entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1988 U.S.-Belgium Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (identification of bank information) is 
added as Article 12 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (joint investigative teams) is added as 
Article 12 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) is added as Articles 
18(2 bis) and 12 quarter; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
set forth in Article 17(3); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (assistance to administrative or 
regulatory authorities) is added as Article 1(1 bis); and 
Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) is added as Article 13 bis.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, paragraph 
1(a)(ii) of the bilateral instrument and Article 12 bis of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specify that 
Belgium's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is the Minister of Justice, and that, like 
the United States, Belgium 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 the States may notify each 
other.

Cyprus

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Cyprus was signed on January 20, 2006. Paragraph 1 of the 
bilateral instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the United 
States and Cyprus. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the 
instrument reflects the integrated text that shall apply 
between the United States and Cyprus. Paragraphs 3-5 contain 
rules on territorial application, entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1999 U.S.-Cyprus Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (identification of bank information) is 
added as Article 17 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (joint investigative teams) is added as 
Article 17 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) is added to Article 6 
and as Article 17 quater; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
set forth in a new formulation that replaces Article 4(1); 
Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities) is 
added as Article 1 (1 bis); and Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) replaces Article 
7(1)-(3).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 17 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Cyprus' point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is its central authority under 
Article 2 of the 1999 Treaty (i.e., the Minister of Justice and 
Public Order or his designee), and that it will provide 
assistance under this Article with respect to offenses 
punishable by a penalty involving deprivation of liberty or a 
detention order of a maximum period of at least four years in 
the requesting State and at least two years in the requested 
State.

Czech Republic

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with the 
Czech Republic was signed on May 16, 2006, and is entitled a 
supplementary treaty to the 1998 U.S.-Czech Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty. Articles 1 through 6 of the supplementary 
treaty incorporate the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement provisions into the 1998 MLAT, as follows: Articles 4 
(identification of bank information), 5 (joint investigative 
teams), and 6 (video-conferencing) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement, reflected in Articles 3, 6-8 of the 
supplementary treaty, are added as new Articles 6(1)(d), 20a, 
20b and 20c of the 1998 MLAT. Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of 
requests), reflected in Article 2 of the supplementary treaty, 
replaces Article 4(1) of the 1998 MLAT. Article 8 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities), reflected in Article 
1 of the supplementary treaty, replaces Article 2(1) and (2) of 
the 1998 MLAT. Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (use limitations), reflected in Article 4 of the 
supplementary treaty, replaces Article 7 of the 1998 MLAT. 
Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(requesting State's request for confidentiality), reflected in 
Article 5 of the supplementary treaty, replaces Article 8 of 
the 1998 MLAT.
    Articles 9 and 11 of the supplementary treaty reflect the 
provisions of Articles 12 (temporal application) and 18 (entry 
into force and termination) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement. Article 10 confirms that the 
supplementary treaty shall be interpreted consistent with the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 6 of the 
supplementary treaty (identification of bank information) 
specifies that the Czech Republic's point of contact for the 
exchange of bank information under this Article is its central 
authority (i.e., the Office of the Prosecutor General and the 
Ministry of Justice); and that, like the United States, the 
Czech Republic will provide assistance under this Article with 
respect to money laundering and terrorist activities punishable 
under the laws of both States, and other criminal activity as 
the States may notify each other.

Denmark

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Denmark was signed on June 23, 2005, and is entitled an 
agreement. The bilateral agreement, in paragraph 1, specifies 
the articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Denmark. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the agreement reflects the 
provisions that shall apply between the United States and 
Denmark. Paragraph 3, in accordance with Article 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, provides that the 
instrument shall not apply to Greenland or the Faroe Islands 
unless the United States and the EU, by exchange of diplomatic 
notes duly confirmed by Denmark, subsequently agree otherwise. 
Paragraphs 4 and 5 contain rules of temporal application, based 
on those set forth in Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement. Paragraph 6 contains the provisions on 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Article 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Since the United States and Denmark do not have a bilateral 
mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, the 
bilateral agreement is a partial one governing only those 
issues regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, specifically: Article 4 (identification of bank 
information), 5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video 
conferencing), 7 (expedited transmission of requests), 8 
(assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 
(use limitations), 10 (requesting State's request for 
confidentiality), and 13 (grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Denmark's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, and that Denmark 
will provide assistance under this Article with respect to 
offenses punishable under the laws of the requesting State by a 
penalty of four years and under the laws of the requested State 
by a penalty of two years. Article 5 of the Annex provides that 
requests for assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities shall be transmitted between the U.S. Department of 
Justice and the Danish Ministry of Justice.

Estonia

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Estonia was signed on February 8, 2006. The bilateral 
instrument, in paragraph 1, specifies the articles of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the 
United States and Estonia. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex 
to the instrument reflects the integrated text that shall apply 
between the United States and Estonia. Paragraphs 3-5 contains 
rules of temporal application, entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1998 U.S.-Estonia Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty, as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (identification of bank information) is 
added as Article 17 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (joint investigative teams) is added as 
Article 17 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (video conferencing) is added in Articles 
6 and 17 quater; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities) is added as Article 1 (1 bis); and Article 9 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) 
replaces the majority of Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 17 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Estonia's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, and 
that Estonia will provide assistance under this Article with 
respect to offenses punishable under the laws of the requesting 
and requested States.

Finland

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Finland was signed on December 16, 2004, and is entitled a 
treaty. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral treaty specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement that 
are to be applied. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the 
treaty reflects the provisions that shall apply between the 
United States and Finland. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules on 
temporal application, entry into force and termination, based 
on those set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Since the United States and Finland do not have a bilateral 
mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, the 
bilateral treaty is a partial one governing only those issues 
regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, 
specifically: Articles 4 (identification of bank information), 
5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video-conferencing), 7 
(expedited transmission of requests), 8 (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 (use limitations), 
10 (requesting State's request for confidentiality); and 13 
(grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Articles 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Finland's point of contact of the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is its Military of Justice, and that, like 
the United States, Finland 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 the States may notify each 
other. Article 5 of the Annex provides that requests for 
assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities shall be 
transmitted between the U.S. Department of Justice and the 
Finnish Ministry of Justice.

France

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
France was signed on September 30, 2004. Paragraph A of 
Articles I-VI sets forth the text of the articles of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the 
United States and France. Paragraph B of Articles I-VI 
specifies the extent to which these provisions supplement or 
replace provisions of the 1998 U.S.-France Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty, and provides other necessary explanations 
regarding the manner in which the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement text is to operate in a bilateral setting. 
Articles VII-VIII contain rules of temporal application, entry 
into force and termination based on those set forth in Articles 
12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Six provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1998 MLAT, as follows: 
Articles 4 (identification of bank information), 5 (joint 
investigative teams), 6 (video conferencing), 7 (expedited 
transmission of requests), and 8 (requests by administrative or 
regulatory authorities) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement supplement the provisions of the 1998 MLAT. Article 
9(1)-(4) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) applies in place of Article 14(3)-(5) of the 1998 
MLAT; although, pursuant to U.S.-EU Article 9(4), Article 14 of 
the 1998 Treaty may be applied if to do so would result in less 
limitation on use.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article I 
(identification of bank information) specifies that France's 
point of contact for the exchange of bank information under 
this Article is its central authority under Article 2(1) of the 
1998 Treaty (i.e., the Ministry of Justice), and that France 
will provide assistance under this Article even in the absence 
of dual criminality.

Germany

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Germany was signed on April 18, 2006, and is entitled a 
supplementary treaty to the 2003 U.S.-Germany Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty. The instrument foresees the entry into force 
of the 2003 bilateral treaty prior to, or contemporaneous with, 
the entry into force of this bilateral supplementary treaty.
    Articles 1-7 of the bilateral supplementary treaty 
incorporates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
provisions into the 2003 MLAT as follow: Article 4 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of bank 
information) is added as Article 9 bis: Article 5 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 12 bis; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video conferencing) is added 
as Article 10 bis, and the costs provision thereof is 
incorporated in Article 21(1); Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) 
is incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
17(3); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (requests by administrative or regulatory 
authorities) is set forth in a new formulation replacing 
Article 1(1) of, and adding a new Article 2(5) to, the 2003 
MLAT; and Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (use limitations) is incorporated through new 
formulations that replace Articles 15 and 16. The final two 
articles of the supplementary treaty reflect the provisions of 
Articles 12 (temporal application) and 18 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 3 of the 
supplementary treaty (identification of bank information) 
specifies that Germany's point of contact for the exchange of 
bank information under this Article is the Federal Ministry of 
Justice, and that, like the United States, Germany 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 the States 
may notify each other.
    The United States and Germany agreed that the penultimate 
sentence of the new text of Article 16 of the supplementary 
treaty entitles U.S. authorities competent in treating 
antitrust offenses (including the U.S. Central Authority for 
mutual legal assistance) to disclose to other authorities 
evidence or information received from Germany that may aid in 
the investigation or prosecution of other offenses.

Greece

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Greece was signed on January 18, 2006, and is entitled a 
protocol to the 1999 U.S.-Greece Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty. Articles 1 through 6 of the bilateral protocol 
incorporate the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
provisions into the 1999 MLAT, as follow: Article 4 
(identification of bank information), 5 (joint investigative 
teams), 6 (video-conferencing), and 8 (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities), of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, set forth in Articles 1, 2, 
3 and 5 of the bilateral protocol, generally supplement the 
provisions of the 1999 MLAT. Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of 
requests), set forth in Article 4 of the bilateral protocol, 
supplements Article 4(1). Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (use limitations), set forth in Article 6 
of the bilateral protocol, replaces Article 7, paragraphs 1, 3, 
and 4.
    The final provisions of the bilateral protocol are as 
follows: Article 7 thereof confirms that other provisions of 
the 1999 MLAT remain in force, and that the protocol shall be 
interpreted consistent with the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement. Article 8 and 9 reflect the provisions of Article 12 
(temporal application) and 18 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
protocol (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Greece's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is the Ministry of Justice; and that, like 
the United States, Greece will provide assistance under this 
Article with respect to money laundering and terrorist 
activities punishable under the laws of both States and with 
respect to such other criminal activity as the States may 
notify each other.

Hungary

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Hungary was signed on November 15, 2005, and is entitled a 
protocol to the 1994 U.S.-Hungary Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty. Articles 1 through 8 of the bilateral protocol 
incorporate the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
provisions into the 1994 MILAT, as follow: Article 4 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of 
bank information) is added as Article 17A; Article 5 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigation 
teams) is added as Article 17B; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) is added as 
Article 6(2) and 17C; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities) is added as Article 1 (1A); Article 9 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) is 
incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 7; 
and Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(requesting State's request for confidentiality) is added as 
Article 7A.
    The final provisions of the bilateral protocol are as 
follows: Articles 9 and 10 of the bilateral protocol reflect 
the provisions of Article 12 (temporal application) and 18 
(entry into force and termination) of the U.S-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 6 of the 
protocol (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Hungary's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is the Prosecutor General, provided however 
that a request from Hungary concerning a matter in which trial 
has commenced shall be transmitted by the Ministry of Justice. 
With respect to the scope of Article 4, Hungary will provide 
assistance under this Article with respect to criminal activity 
punishable under the laws of both States.

Ireland

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Ireland was signed on July 14, 2005. The 2001 U.S.-Ireland 
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty is not yet in force, having been 
ratified by the United States but not by Ireland. Ireland 
intends to ratify the 2001 Treaty and this instrument 
contemporaneously.
    Article 1 of the bilateral instrument specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Ireland. Article 2 
provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects the 
integrated text that shall apply between the United States and 
Ireland. Articles 3-5 contain rules on temporal application, 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 2001 MLAT as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of bank 
information) is added as Article 16 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 16 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) amends 
Article 6 and is added as Article 16 quater; Article 7 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited 
transmission of requests) is set forth in a new formulation and 
replaces Article 4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (assistance to administrative or 
regulatory authorities) is added as Article 1 (1 bis); and 
Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) replaces Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 16 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Ireland's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is its central authority under 
Article 2 of the 2001 MLAT (i.e., the Minister of Justice, 
Equality and Law Reform, or designee), and that it 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 other criminal activity punishable 
by a maximum sentence of at least five years' imprisonment or 
more serious penalty under Irish law and also punishable under 
United States law.
    Finally, although not required by the U.S.-EU Agreement, 
the United States and Ireland revised the forms to be used in 
conjunction with application of the bilateral instrument. The 
result is that Forms A, B, C, D, and E of the 2001 MLAT have 
been renumbered as Forms A1, B1, C1, D1, and E1 are to be used 
when Ireland is the requesting Party. When the United States is 
the requesting Party, new forms A2, B2, C2, D2, and E2 have 
been provided, which are identical in many respects but which 
contain minor modifications sought by Ireland in order to 
better conform to its law and practice.

Italy

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with Italy 
was signed on May 3, 2006. The instrument, in paragraph 1, 
specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement applicable between the United States and Italy. 
Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects 
the integrated text that shall apply between the United States 
and Italy. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contain rules of temporal 
application, based on those set forth in Article 12 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. Paragraph 5 provides 
for a change to Article 18 (seizure, immobilization, and 
forfeiture of assets) of the 1982 U.S.-Italy Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty. Paragraph 6 contains the provisions on entry 
into force and termination, based on those set forth in Article 
18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates Articles 4-11 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement into the 1982 MLAT, as follows: 
Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(identification of bank information) is added as Article 18 
bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(joint investigative teams) is added as Article 18 ter; Article 
6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video 
conferencing) is added as Article 18 quater and through a 
change to Article 7 (costs); Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) 
is incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
2(3); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities) is added as Article 1(1 bis); and Article 9 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) 
replaces the majority of Article 8.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 18 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Italy's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Minister of Justice. 
Article 18 bis also specifies that Italy will provide 
assistance under this Article with respect to terrorist and 
money laundering activity punishable under the law of both 
States. Since Italian law does not punish the person committing 
the predicate offense for the separate offense of money 
laundering, it further states that Italy shall provide 
cooperation with respect to activities punishable as the 
offense of money laundering in the United States but as a 
predicate offense to money laundering under Italian law. 
Finally, Italy also will provide assistance with respect to 
such other criminal activity as it may subsequently designate.
    In addition, as mentioned above, although not required by 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, the United 
States and Italy modified Article 18 of the 1982 MLAT (seizure, 
immobilization, and forfeiture of assets), in order to replace 
the original formulation, which had not been implemented in 
accordance with an exchange of diplomatic notes between the 
United States and Italy dated November 13, 1985. The Parties 
also agreed that the formulation in Article 2(3) does not 
change the current, non-treaty-based practice, whereby requests 
are made by the Central Authorities, although in executing 
requests the relevant executing authorities may communicate 
with authorities of the other country.

Latvia

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Latvia was signed on December 7, 2005, and is entitled a 
protocol to the 1997 U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty. 
Articles 1-7 of the bilateral protocol incorporate the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement provisions into the 1997 MLAT 
as follows: Articles 4(1)-(5) (identification of bank 
information), 5 (joint investigative teams), and 6(1), (3)-(6) 
(video conferencing) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement are added as Articles 17a-17c; Article 6(2) of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (cost of video 
conference) is added as Article 6(d)(costs); Article 7 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited 
transmission of requests) is incorporated through a new 
formulation that replaces Article 4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (request by administrative 
or regulatory authorities) is added as Article 1(1)(b) and (c); 
and Article 9(1)-(3) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (use limitations) replaces the majority of Article 7. 
The final two articles of the bilateral protocol reflect the 
provisions of Articles 12 (temporal application) and 18 (entry 
into force and termination) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 5 of the 
bilateral protocol (identification of bank information) 
specifies that Latvia's point of contact for the exchange of 
bank information under this Article is the Office of the 
Prosecutor General during the pre-trial investigation, and the 
Ministry of Justice during trial. Latvia will provide 
assistance under this Article with respect to any criminal 
activity.

Lithuania

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Lithuania was signed on June 15, 2005, and is entitled a 
protocol to the 1998 U.S.-Lithuania Mutual Legal Assistance 
Treaty. The bilateral protocol, in paragraph 1, specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Lithuania. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the protocol reflects the integrated 
text that shall apply between the United States and Lithuania. 
Paragraphs 3-5 contains rules of temporal application, entry 
into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into, the 1998 MLAT as follows: Article 4 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of 
bank information) is added as Article 16 bis; Article 5 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 16 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video conferencing) is added 
in Articles 6 and 16 quater; Article 7 of the U.S.-Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) is 
incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
4(1); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (channel for transmission of requests by 
administrative or regulatory authorities) is added as Article 
2(2)(b) (subparagraph (a) of which had already provided for the 
authority required by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement in Article 8(1) to make such requests); and Article 9 
of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) replaces the majority of Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 16 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Lithuania's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Office of the Prosecutor 
General, and that, like the United States, Lithuania 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 
the States may notify each other.

Luxembourg

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
luxembourg was signed on February 1, 2005. Paragraph A of 
Articles I-VI sets forth the text of the articles of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the 
United States and Luxembourg. Paragraph B of Articles I-VI 
specifies the extent to which these provisions supplement or 
replace provisions of the 1997 U.S.-Luxembourg Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty, and provides other necessary explanations 
regarding the manner in which the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement text is to operate in a bilateral setting. 
Articles VII-VIII contain rules of temporal application, entry 
into force and termination based on those set forth in Articles 
12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Six provisions of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1997 MLAT provisions as 
follows: Articles 4 (identification of bank information), 5 
(joint investigative teams), 6 (video conferencing), 7 
(expedited transmission of requests), and 8(2) (channel for 
transmission of requests by administrative or regulatory 
authorities) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
supplement the provisions of the 1997 MLAT. Article 9 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) 
applies in place of Article 7 of the 1997 MLAT; although, 
pursuant to U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement Article 
9(4), Article 7 may be applied if to do so would result in less 
limitation on use; and, pursuant to U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement Article 9(5), Luxembourg shall continue to 
apply Article 7 of the 1997 MLAT with respect to the tax 
offenses described in that treaty.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article I 
(identification of bank information) specifies that 
Luxembourg's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is its Central Authority under 
Article 2 of the 1997 MLAT (the Parquet General), and that, 
like the United States, Luxembourg 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 the States may 
notify each other.

Malta

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with Malta 
was signed on May 18, 2006. Paragraph 1 specifies the articles 
of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement that are to be 
applied. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument 
reflects the provisions that shall apply between the United 
States and Malta. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules on temporal 
application, entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement.
    Since the United States and Malta do not have a bilateral 
mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, the 
instrument is a partial treaty governing only those issues 
regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, 
specifically: Articles 4 (identification of bank information), 
5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video-conferencing), 7 
(expedited transmission of requests), 8 (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 (use limitations), 
10 (requesting State's request for confidentiality); and 13 
(grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Malta's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is the Office of the Attorney General, and 
that, like the United States, Malta 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 the States may 
notify each other. Article 5 of the Annex provides that 
requests for assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities shall be transmitted between the U.S. Department of 
Justice and the Office of the Attorney General of Malta.

The Netherlands

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with the 
Netherlands was signed on September 29, 2004, and is entitled 
an agreement. Article 1 of the bilateral agreement specifies 
the articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and the Netherlands. 
Article 2 provides that the Annex to the agreement reflects the 
integrated text that shall apply between the United States and 
the Netherlands. Article 3 provides that the bilateral 
agreement shall not apply to the Netherlands Antilles or Aruba 
unless the United States and the EU, by exchange of diplomatic 
notes, subsequently agree to extend its application to them. 
Articles 4-6 contain rules on temporal application, entry into 
force and termination, based on those set forth in Articles 12 
and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1981 U.S.-Netherlands Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of bank information) 
is added as Article 9 bis of the 1981 MLAT; Article 5 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 9 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) is added 
as Article 17(1) and Article 9 quater; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of 
requests) is added as Article 14(2); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (assistance to administrative 
or regulatory authorities) is added as Article 1 (1 bis); 
Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) is incorporated through a new Article 11 bis which 
replaces Article 11(2); and Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (requesting State's request for 
confidentiality) is added as Article 11(2).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 9 bis of 
the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
the Netherlands' point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is its competent authority under 
Article 14 of the 1981 MLAT (i.e., the Minister of Justice), 
and that the Netherlands will provide assistance under this 
Article with respect to activity punishable under the laws of 
both States and which is a ``misdrijf'' (crime) under Dutch 
law, a term which includes but is not limited to money 
laundering and terrorist activity.
    In addition, the Schedule to the Annex (availability of 
search and seizure for certain offenses) has been modified to 
provide the texts of Dutch legislation currently in force, and 
to enable an exchange of notes to set forth the applicable 
provisions of law should the agreement be applied in future to 
the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. Finally, by exchange of 
diplomatic notes contemporaneous with signature of the 
bilateral agreement, the United States and the Netherlands 
agreed that prior diplomatic notes exchanged on June 12, 1981, 
with respect to the application of the 1981 MLAT shall continue 
to apply to the corresponding provisions of the Annex, except 
for the second paragraph pertaining to Article 11 of the 1981 
MLAT, which was deemed incompatible with Article 9 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. The exchange of 
diplomatic notes in conjunction with signing the bilateral 
agreement also confirms that the prior exchange of notes of 
December 31, 1985, applying the 1981 MLAT to the Netherlands 
Antilles and Aruba, remains unaffected by the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement, and that the explanatory note to 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applies to the 
corresponding provisions of the Annex.

Poland

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Poland was signed on June 9, 2006, and is entitled an 
agreement. The bilateral agreement, in Article 1, specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Poland. Article 2 
provides that the Annex to the agreement reflects the 
integrated text that shall apply between the United States and 
Poland. Articles 3 and 4 contain rules of temporal application, 
based on those set forth in Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement. Article 5 contains the provisions 
on entry into force and termination, based on those set forth 
in Article 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1996 Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, as 
follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (identification of bank information) is added as 
Article 3 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (joint investigative teams) is added as Article 9 
bis; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Assistance Agreement 
(video conferencing) is added as Articles 8 bis and through a 
change to Article 6 (costs); Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) 
is incorporated through a new formulation that replaces Article 
4(a); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities) is added as Article 1 bis; and Article 9 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use limitations) 
replaces the majority of Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 3 bis of 
the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Poland's point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is its central authority under Article 2 of 
the 1996 MLAT (i.e., the Minister of Justice-Attorney General, 
or designee), and that Poland 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 acclivity as the States may 
notify each other.

Portugal

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Portugal was signed on July 14, 2005. Paragraph 1 specifies of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement that are to be 
applied and the designations and notifications required by 
Article 15 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. 
Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects 
the provisions that shall apply between the United States and 
Portugal. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules on temporal application, 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement.
    Since the United States and Portugal do not have a 
bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, 
the bilateral instrument is a partial treaty governing only 
those issues regulated by the U.S.-Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, specifically: Articles 4 (identification of bank 
information), 5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video-
conferencing), 7 (expedited transmission of request), 8 
(assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 
(use limitations), 10 (requesting State's request for 
confidentiality); and 13 (grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, paragraph 1(a) 
of the bilateral instrument and Article 1 of the Annex 
(identification of bank information) specify that Portugal's 
point of contact for the exchange of bank information under 
this Article is the Prosecutor General's Office (Procuradoria 
Geral da Republica), and that Portugal will provide assistance 
under this Article with respect to organized crime, money 
laundering, drug trafficking, and terrorist activity punishable 
under the laws of both States and with respect to such other 
criminal activity as Portugal may notify the United States. 
Paragraph 1(e) of the bilateral instrument and Article 5 of the 
Annex provide that requests for assistance to administrative or 
regulatory authorities shall be transmitted between the U.S. 
Department of Justice and the Portuguese Prosecutor General's 
Office (Procuradoria Geral da Republica).

Slovak Republic

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with the 
Slovak Republic was signed on February 6, 2006. Paragraph 1 
provides that the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
shall be applied between them in the manner set forth in the 
instrument and its Annex. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex 
reflects the provisions that shall apply between the United 
States and the Slovak Republic. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules on 
temporal application, entry into force and termination, based 
on those set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement.
    Since the United States and the Slovak Republic do not have 
a bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty in force between 
them, the bilateral instrument is a partial treaty governing 
only those issues regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement, specifically: Articles 4 (identification 
of bank information), 5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video-
conferencing), 7 (expedited transmission of requests), 8 
(assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 
(use limitations), 10 (requesting State's request for 
confidentiality); and 13 (grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that the 
Slovak Republic's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, and 
that, like the United States, the Slovak Republic 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 the States 
may notify each other. Article 5 of the Annex provides that 
requests for assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities shall be transmitted between the U.S. Department of 
Justice and the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic.

Slovenia

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Slovenia was signed on October 17, 2005, and is entitled an 
agreement. The bilateral agreement, in paragraph 1, specifies 
the articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Slovenia. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the agreement reflects the 
provisions that shall apply between the United States and 
Slovenia. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules of temporal application, 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement.
    Because the United States and Slovenia do not have a 
bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty in force between them, 
the bilateral agreement is a partial treaty governing only 
those issues regulated by the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, specifically: Article 4 (identification of bank 
information), 5 (joint investigative teams), 6 (video 
conferencing), 7 (expedited transmission of requests), 8 
(assistance to administrative or regulatory authorities), 9 
(use limitations), 10 (requesting State's request for 
confidentiality), and 13 (grounds for refusal).
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 1 of the 
Annex (identification of bank information) specifies that 
Slovenia point of contact for the exchange of bank information 
under this Article is its Ministry of Justice, and that, like 
the United States, Slovenia will provide assistance under this 
Article with respect to money laundering and terrorist activity 
punishable under the laws of both the requesting and requested 
States, and with respect to such other criminal activity as the 
States may notify each other. Article 5 of the Annex provides 
that requests for assistance to administrative or regulatory 
authorities shall be transmitted between the U.S. Department of 
Justice and the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of 
Slovenia.

Spain

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with Spain 
was signed on December 17, 2004. The bilateral instrument, in 
paragraph 1, specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement applicable between the United States and 
Spain. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument 
reflects the provisions that shall apply between the United 
States and Spain. Paragraphs 3-5 contain rules of temporal 
application, entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Articles 12 and 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal 
Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement into 
the 1990 U.S.-Spain Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, as follow: 
Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(identification of bank information) is added as Article 16 
bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(joint investigative teams) is added as Article 16 ter; Article 
6 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Assistance Agreement (video 
conferencing) is added in Articles 6 and 16 quater; Article 7 
of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited 
transmission of requests) is incorporated through a new 
formulation that replaces Article 4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities) is added as Article 
1(1 bis); and Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (use limitations) replaces the majority of Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 16 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Spain's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, and 
that, like the United States, Spain 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 the States may 
notify each other.

Sweden

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with 
Sweden was signed on December 16, 2004. The instrument foresees 
the entry into force of the 2001 U.S.-Sweden Mutual Legal 
Assistance Treaty prior to, or contemporaneous with, the entry 
into force of this bilateral instrument.
    Paragraph 1 of the bilateral instrument specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Sweden. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects the 
provisions that shall apply between the United States and 
Sweden. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contain rules temporal application 
based on those set forth in Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement. Paragraph 5 governs entry into 
force termination, based on Article 18 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 2001 MLAT as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of bank 
information) is added as Article 18 bis; Article 5 of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 18 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video-conferencing) is added 
as Articles 6(d) and 18 quater; Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual 
Legal Assistance Agreement (expedited transmission of requests) 
is integrated as a new formulation of Article 4(a); Article 
8(2) of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(transmission of requests for assistance to administrative or 
regulatory authorities) is added as Article 2(3)(b); and 
Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (use 
limitations) replaces Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 18 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that Sweden's point of contact for the exchange of bank 
information under this Article is the Ministry of Justice, and 
that Sweden will provide assistance under this Article with 
respect to offenses punishable under the laws of both States.

United Kingdom

    The bilateral mutual legal assistance instrument with the 
United Kingdom was signed on December 16, 2004. The bilateral 
instrument, in paragraph 1, specifies the articles of the U.S.-
EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement applicable between the 
United States and the UK Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to 
the instrument reflects the integrated text that shall apply 
between the United States and UK Paragraph 3, in accordance 
with Article 16 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement, provides that the instrument applies to Great 
Britain and Northern Ireland, but not to the Channel Islands, 
the Isle of Man or other territories to which the 1994 U.S.-UK 
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty applies. Paragraphs 4-5 contain 
rules of temporal application, based on those set forth in 
Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement. 
Paragraph 6 contains the provisions on entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Article 18 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement into the 1994 MLAT, as follows: Article 4 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (identification of 
bank information) is added as Article 16 bis; Article 5 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (joint investigative 
teams) is added as Article 16 ter; Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (video conferencing) is added 
as Article 16 quater and through a change to Article 6 (costs); 
Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement 
(expedited Transmission of requests) is incorporated through a 
new formulation that replaces Article 4(1); Article 8 of the 
U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement (assistance to 
administrative or regulatory authorities) is added as Article 1 
(1 bis); and Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance 
Agreement (use limitations) replaces the majority of Article 7.
    With respect to the designations required by Article 15 of 
the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement, Article 16 bis 
of the Annex (identification of bank information) specifies 
that the United Kingdom's point of contact for the exchange of 
bank information under this Article is the Lord Advocate, where 
the request relates only to Scotland, the Secretary of State 
for Northern Ireland, where the request relates only to 
Northern Ireland, and the Secretary of State for the Home 
Department in all other cases, and that the UK 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 the States 
may notify each other.
    In addition, upon signature, the United States and UK 
exchanged diplomatic notes stating that previous notes with 
respect to the 1994 MLAT, exchanged on January 6, 1994, 
(providing clarifications with respect to Articles 3(1)(a), 
3(1)(b), 7(2) and 18 of the Treaty), and on April 30 and May 1, 
2001, (revoking paragraph (d) of the 1994 exchange), shall 
remain applicable.


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]