Text - Treaty Document: Senate Consideration of Treaty Document 109-14All 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 109-14]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]






109th Congress                                              Treaty Doc.
 2d Session                      SENATE                          109-14
_______________________________________________________________________
 
                     EXTRADITION AGREEMENT WITH THE

                             EUROPEAN UNION

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

 AGREEMENT ON EXTRADITION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE 
 EUROPEAN UNION (EU), SIGNED ON JUNE 25, 2003 AT WASHINGTON, TOGETHER 
 WITH TWENTY-TWO 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. THE AGREEMENT INCLUDES AN 
      EXPLANATORY NOTE WHICH IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE AGREEMENT

[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 : 2006















                         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 
Extradition between the United States of America and the 
European Union (EU), signed on June 25, 2003, at Washington, 
together with 22 bilateral instruments that subsequently were 
signed between the United States and European Union Member 
States 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. The bilateral instruments with three EU 
Member States, Estonia, Latvia, and Malta, take the form of 
comprehensive new extradition treaties, and therefore will be 
submitted individually.
    A parallel agreement with the European Union on mutual 
legal assistance, 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 Extradition Agreement contains several 
provisions that should improve the scope and operation of 
bilateral extradition treaties in force between the United 
States and each EU Member State. For example, it requires 
replacing outdated lists of extraditable offenses included in 
10 older bilateral treaties with the modern ``dual 
criminality'' approach, thereby enabling coverage of such newer 
offenses as money laundering. Another important provision 
ensures that a U.S. extradition request is not disfavored by an 
EU Member State that receives a competing request for the 
person from another Member State pursuant to the newly created 
European Arrest Warrant. Finally, the Extradition Agreement 
simplifies procedural requirements for preparing and 
transmitting extradition documents, easing and speeding the 
current process.
    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 2, 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 Extradition between the United 
States and the European Union (EU) (``U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement''), signed on June 25, 2003. Also being submitted 
together with the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are 22 
bilateral instruments that were signed by the United States and 
EU Member States during 2004-2006. The bilateral instruments 
with three EU Member States, Estonia, Latvia, and Malta, take 
the form of comprehensive new extradition treaties, and 
therefore are being submitted individually. I recommend that 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, 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 of 
Justice joins me in this recommendation.
    Respectfully submitted.
                                                  Condoleezza Rice.
    Attachments:
    1. Overview and analysis of the provisions of the 
Agreement.
    2. Draft message to the Senate.

                     U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement


                                OVERVIEW

    The U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement selectively amends and 
supplements existing United States bilateral extradition 
treaties with all Member States of the EU. A counterpart 
Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance between the United States 
and the European Union is being submitted separately.
    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 extradition 
treaties between the United States and EU Member States would 
be a valuable step, because a number of such treaties were 
concluded in the early 20th century and do not reflect more 
recent improvements in extradition practice. 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 would 
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 were 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 extradition 
instruments. Initial efforts focused on the fifteen states 
which were members of the European Union at the time the U.S.-
EU Agreements were signed, and then expanded to the additional 
ten states that joined the EU in 2004. The last of the 
bilateral instruments were signed on June 9, 2006.
    The U.S.-EU Extradition 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 Extradition 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 
Extradition 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 Extradition Agreement and the 
bilateral instrument. A number of Member States also secured 
domestic parliamentary endorsement of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement prior to its signature.
    The following is an article-by-article description of the 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 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 in the context of applicable extradition relations 
between the United States and individual EU Member States, in 
the manner provided in the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Since 
extradition between the United States and EU Member States is 
carried out pursuant to bilateral extradition 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 Extradition Agreement.
    Article 2 (``Definitions'') defines three terms used 
frequently in the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement: ``Contracting 
Parties,'' ``Member States,'' and ``Ministry of Justice.''
    Article 2(1) provides that the Contracting Parties to the 
U.S.-EU Extradition 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) led negotiations for the European Union. At 
the conclusion of negotiations, Greece was authorized 
unanimously by the European Council to sign the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement on behalf of the European Union.
    Article 3 (``Scope of application'') (1) provides that the 
Contracting Parties shall ensure that the provisions of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are applied in relation to 
existing bilateral extradition 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 extradition relationships 
with the United States.
    The remainder of Article 3(1) specifies the manner in which 
existing bilateral extradition treaties between the United 
States and EU Member States are affected by Articles 4-14 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Some of these articles serve 
to supplement or modify the existing provisions in all 
bilateral extradition treaties between the United States and EU 
Member States, while others only affect certain bilateral 
treaties. There were two main reasons for this approach. One 
was to update a significant number of outmoded extradition 
treaties in force between the United States and EU Member 
States that were 35 to 100 years old, but not to affect more 
modern treaties that already had similar or identical 
provisions to those contained in the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement. The other reason was that certain provisions 
contained in the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement facilitated 
cooperation to a greater extent than some existing bilateral 
treaties. Article 3 therefore ensures that the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement's provisions affect only those bilateral 
treaties that would be enhanced thereby.
    Accordingly, paragraph 1(a) provides that Article 4 
(applying a ``dual criminality'' approach to extraditable 
offenses) replaces the extraditable offense provisions of older 
treaties in which extradition is available only with respect to 
a list of specified offenses. Paragraph 1(b) provides that 
Article 5 (streamlining the formal process of authenticating 
and transmitting extradition requests) replaces the existing 
corresponding provisions of all existing treaties. Paragraph 
1(c) provides that Article 6 (authorizing direct transmission 
of provisional arrest requests between justice ministries) 
applies only where the existing treaty does not already have 
such a provision. Paragraph 1(d) provides that Article 7 
(authorizing delivery of the formal extradition request to the 
embassy of the requested State in the requesting State in order 
to satisfy the time restrictions for detaining a person 
provisionally arrested) supplements existing bilateral treaty 
provisions. Paragraph 1(e) provides that Article 8 (setting 
forth the procedure for the request and submission of 
supplemental information) applies to the extent the existing 
treaty does not already have such a procedure. Paragraph 1(f) 
provides that Article 9 (authorizing temporary surrender of 
persons) applies only where the existing treaty does not 
already have such a provision. Paragraph 1(g) provides that 
Article 10 (setting forth the procedure for deciding among 
competing extradition requests, including requests for 
surrender among European Union Member States under the European 
Arrest Warrant) both replaces the competing request provision 
of all existing treaties, and supplements any existing treaty 
that does not already have such a provision. Paragraph 1(h) 
provides that Article 11 (authorizing simplified extradition or 
waiver of extradition) applies only where the existing treaty 
does not already have such a provision. Paragraph 1(i) provides 
that Article 12 (setting forth the procedure for transit) 
applies only to the extent that the existing treaty does not 
already have such a procedure. Paragraph 1(j) provides that 
Article 13 (governing capital punishment) may be applied in 
place of the corresponding provision of the existing treaty. 
Finally, paragraph 1(k) provides that Article 14 (setting forth 
the procedure governing the treatment of sensitive information 
in a request) applies where the existing treaty does not 
already have such a provision.
    The extent to which current individual extradition 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 Extradition 
Agreement by its Member States. Specifically, the EU shall 
ensure that each Member State acknowledges the consequential 
changes to its existing bilateral extradition 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 Extradition Agreement and having extradition 
treaties with the United States conclude bilateral instruments 
with the United States after accession or preferably prior 
thereto.
    Paragraph 3 states that the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
shall apply in extradition 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 extradition 
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 Extradition 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 practititioners and the 
judiciary.
    Article 4 (``Extraditable offenses'') updates the 
provisions of ten older extradition treaties currently in force 
that use the outmoded approach of permitting extradition only 
with respect to a list of offenses set forth in the treaty. As 
discussed above concerning Article 3(1)(a), Article 4 replaces 
the extraditable offense provisions only in such older 
treaties. The replacement provision corresponds to that of many 
other modern U.S. extradition treaties.
    Paragraph 1 defines an offense as extraditable if the 
conduct on which the offense is based is punishable under the 
laws in both States for a period exceeding one year or more 
severe penalty, thus obviating the need to renegotiate the 
treaty as additional offenses become punishable under the laws 
in both States; it provides for attempt, conspiracy and 
participation offenses to be considered extraditable; and it 
provides a minimum sentence remaining to be served if 
extradition is sought for the enforcement of a sentence already 
imposed. The Parties intended to include the offenses of 
aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring the commission of an 
offense, as well as being an accessory to an offense, under the 
broad description of participation.
    Paragraph 2 provides that if extradition is granted for an 
extraditable offense, it shall also be granted for any other 
offense specified in the request that is punishable by one 
year's imprisonment or less, provided that all other 
requirements for extradition are met.
    Paragraph 3 provides flexibility so that a dual-criminality 
determination is not impeded by the fact that (a) each country 
may place the offense in a different category of offenses, or 
describe the offense by different terminology; (b) use of 
interstate transportation, use of the mails or other facilities 
affecting interstate or foreign commerce is a jurisdictional 
element of a U.S. federal offense for which tradition is 
sought; or (3) in tax, customs duties, currency control or 
import or export control cases, both States do not provide for 
the same kind of tax, duty or control.
    Finally, paragraph 4 provides that extradition shall be 
granted with regard to offenses committed outside the territory 
of the requesting State if the requested State provides for 
punishment of the conduct in such circumstances, and where it 
does not, the executive authority of the requested State, in 
its discretion, may grant extradition if all other applicable 
requirements for extradition are met.
    Article 5 (``Transmission and authentication of 
documents'') addresses two separate issues. Paragraph 1 
provides that transmission of requests for extradition and 
their supporting documents shall be through the diplomatic 
channel, including in the manner provided for in Article 7 
(which addresses a special circumstance in which a state's 
Embassy may receive an extradition request).
    Paragraph 2 provides that extradition documents bearing the 
seal or certificate of the Ministry of Justice (as defined in 
Article 2) or Foreign Ministry of the requesting State are 
admissible as evidence in extradition proceedings. Under the 
terms of Article 3(1)(b), this provision replaces the 
certification and authentication provisions of existing 
bilateral treaties. With respect to extradition documents 
intended for use in extradition proceedings in the United 
States, this procedure simplifies the often burdensome 
authentication procedure contained in older treaties, in a 
manner consistent with U.S. law, 18 U.S.C. 3190, and at the 
same time provides sufficient indicia of authenticity.
    Article 6 (``Transmission of requests for provisional 
arrest'') is intended, pursuant to Article 3(1)(c), to 
supplement the terms of some old extradition treaties in which 
there is currently no provision for provisional arrest requests 
to be sent directly between the U.S. Department of Justice and 
the foreign Ministry of Justice. Article 6 also permits the use 
of Interpol as an alternative channel for submission of 
provisional arrest requests. These channels typically are more 
rapid than the diplomatic channel and, therefore, are 
particularly useful for making provisional arrest requests when 
time is of the essence.
    Article 7 (``Transmission of documents following 
provisional arrest'') supplements the terms of existing 
bilateral extradition treaties between the United States and EU 
Member State (see Article 3(1)(d)). It provides that the 
requesting State may satisfy its obligation to transmit its 
extradition request and supporting documents within the time 
limit specified following the provisional arrest of the 
fugitive, by submitting them to the embassy of the requested 
State in the requesting State. This approach, already provided 
for in several recent U.S. extradition treaties, e.g. the 2001 
treaty with Lithuania, codifies existing jurisprudence (see, 
e.g., United States v. Wiebe, 733 F.2d 549 (8th Cir. 1984), and 
Bozilov v. Seiffert, 983 F.2d 140 (9th Cir., 1993)).
    For those bilateral treaties lacking such a procedure, 
Article 8 (``Supplemental information'') authorizes a State 
making an extradition request to furnish supplemental 
information within a time period specified by the requested 
State, if the request for extradition otherwise would be 
insufficient to fulfill the treaty's requirements. Article 8 
also specifies that such supplementary information may be 
requested and furnished directly between the ministries of 
justice concerned and need not be transmitted through the 
diplomatic channel.
    Similarly, where the current bilateral treaty does not 
already do so (see Article 3(1)(f)), Article 9 (``Temporary 
Surrender'') provides a procedure for temporarily extraditing a 
person being proceeded against or serving a sentence in the 
requested State. The requesting State shall keep the person so 
surrendered in custody and return him to the requested State 
after the conclusion of the proceedings, in accordance with 
conditions determined by mutual agreement of the States.
    Article 10 (``Request for extradition or surrender made by 
several States'') replaces existing provisions of bilateral 
extradition treaties concerning competing requests for 
extradition and supplements existing treaties that contain no 
such provision (see Article 3(1)(g). Paragraph 1 provides that 
the executive authority of the requested State shall determine 
to which State to surrender a person whose extradition is 
sought by more than one State. Paragraph 2 provides that if an 
EU Member State receives a request for surrender pursuant to 
the European Arrest Warrant (``EAW'') and a request for 
extradition from the United States, the designated competent 
authority of the EU Member State shall determine to which State 
to surrender the person. Paragraph 3 contains a non-exhaustive 
list of factors to be considered in making a determination 
under either of these scenarios. As a result, this provision 
makes clear, as a matter of treaty law, that a EAW request to 
one EU Member State from another does not take precedence over 
a competing U.S. extradition request. Since the merits of both 
requests are judged by the paragraph 3 criteria, the provision 
bestows the same status upon a U.S. request for extradition as 
upon a request for surrender under the EAW, for purposes of 
determining which request shall be given priority.
    In connection with Article 10, the Explanatory Note to the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement states that the Contracting 
Parties agree that this provision is not intended to affect the 
obligations of States Parties to the International Criminal 
Court (ICC) or the rights of the United States as a non-Party 
to the ICC. This reflects that the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement does not provide a legal basis for the ICC to take 
jurisdiction over U.S. persons, or for an EU Member State to 
extradite U.S. persons to the ICC.
    Under Article 11 (``Simplified extradition procedures''), 
for those bilateral treaties that do not already contain such a 
provision (see Article 3(1)(h)), a procedure is established for 
surrendering the person sought as expeditiously as possible if 
he agrees to be surrendered to the requesting State without 
further proceedings.
    Similarly, where the current bilateral treaty does not 
already do so (see Article 3(1)(i)), Article 12 (``Transit''), 
paragraphs 1 through 3, provides a procedure for transit 
through the territory of one State of a person being 
surrendered to the other State by a third State or from the 
other State to a third State. If the current bilateral 
extradition treaty contains a transit provision that does not 
specify a procedure for cases of unscheduled landings in the 
transit State, only paragraph 3 is to be applied. Paragraph 2 
also authorizes the detention of the person during the period 
of transit.
    Article 13 (``Capital punishment'') provides that when an 
offense for which extradition is sought is punishable by death 
under the laws in the requesting State but not under the laws 
in the requested State, the requested State may grant 
extradition on condition that the death penalty shall not be 
imposed or, if for procedural reasons such condition cannot be 
complied with by the requesting State, on condition that if 
imposed the death penalty shall not be carried out. This 
formulation is analogous to those of other modern U.S. 
extradition treaties and corresponds to the practice that has 
developed in death penalty cases. In essence, where prosecuting 
authorities have discretion to not seek the death penalty, the 
requested State may subject extradition to the condition that 
the death penalty not be imposed. However, where, under the 
procedures applicable in the jurisdiction seeking extradition, 
this discretion is not absolute, an assurance of non-imposition 
of the death penalty cannot be made. In this case, extradition 
may be subjected only to the condition that if the death 
penalty is imposed, it shall not be carried out. Under Article 
3(1)(j), this provision may be applied to replace existing 
provisions on capital punishment or where the existing treaty 
contains no such provision.
    Under Article 14 (``Sensitive information in a request''), 
where a current bilateral treaty does not already do so (see 
Article 3(1)(k)), a procedure is established whereby a 
requesting State that is considering the submission of 
particularly sensitive information in its extradition request 
may consult the requested State to determine the extent to 
which such information can be protected. The requesting State 
can thereupon determine whether or not it should include the 
information in the request.
    Under Article 15 (``Consultations''), the United States and 
the European Union, as the Contracting Parties, shall consult 
for purposes of enabling the most effective use of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement, including to facilitate resolution of 
disputes regarding its application or interpretation.
    Article 16 (``Temporal application'') provides that the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement applies to offenses committed 
before as well as after it enters into force. Articles 4 
(extraditable offenses) and 9 (temporary surrender) apply to 
requests pending in a requested State at the time of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement's entry into force; otherwise the 
Agreement applies only to requests for extradition made after 
its entry into force.
    Article 17 (``Non-derogation''), paragraph 1, makes clear 
that the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement's provisions do not 
preclude the assertion of a ground for refusal set forth in the 
applicable extradition treaty in respect of a matter not 
governed by the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Under paragraph 
2, consultations are to take place between the requesting and 
requested States should a constitutional principle or judicial 
decision binding upon the requested State pose an impediment to 
the fulfillment of the obligation to extradite, and resolution 
of the matter is not provided for in the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement or the applicable bilateral extradition treaty. Such 
situations occasionally arise in extradition relations as 
constitutional jurisprudence evolves in national courts.
    Article 18 (``Future bilateral extradition treaties with 
Member States'') provides that the United States and EU Member 
States may conclude future bilateral extradition agreements 
consistent with the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. In the 
Explanatory Note, it is clarified that should measures set 
forth in the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement create operational 
difficulties for the United States or a Member State, and 
consultations alone cannot remedy the difficulty, a future 
bilateral agreement with that Member State could contain an 
operationally feasible alternative mechanism that satisfies the 
objectives of the provision in question.
    Article 19 (``Designation and notification'') provides that 
the EU shall notify the United States of designations pursuant 
to Article 2(3) (the authority designated as ``Ministry of 
Justice'' for purposes of the functions specified in the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement) or 10(2) (the authority competent to 
determine priority between a U.S. extradition request and a 
European Arrest Warrant request), prior to the exchange of 
bilateral written instruments between the United States and 
Member States under Article 3(2).
    Under Article 20 (``Territorial application''), paragraph 
1, the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement applies to the United 
States of America, to EU Member States, to territories for 
whose external relations a Member State 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 the EU to agree to include such territories 
or countries within the ambit of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement. Under paragraph 2, application of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement to such territories or countries may be 
terminated upon a six-month prior written notice through the 
diplomatic channel, again where confirmed between the United 
States and the Member State concerned.
    Article 21 (``Review'') provides that the United States and 
the EU will carry out a common review of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition 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 Extradition Agreement, including Article 
10.
    Article 22 (``Entry into force and termination''), 
paragraph 1, provides that the U.S.-EU Extradition 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. Paragraph 
2 provides that either the United States or the EU may 
terminate the U.S.-EU Extradition 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 EU Member States 
        implementing the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement

    As noted above, Article 3(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement requires the conclusion of a written instrument 
between the United States and each Member State, indicating the 
application of the Agreement's provisions in the bilateral 
extradition relationship. The following discussion delineates 
the content and character of each of these instruments (except 
for the three that take the form of full treaties), and any 
understandings reached between the United States and individual 
Member States in the course of negotiations.
    The title chosen for the ``written instrument'' required by 
Article 3(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement varies among 
the Member States. Most Member States preferred to retain the 
general 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, Czech 
Republic) are termed supplementary 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, Poland).
    Each instrument first expresses the agreement of the 
Parties to apply the provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement under the terms laid out in Article 3 of that 
Agreement. 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 extradition treaty with a Member State. A majority 
of Member States agreed. This approach will ease application of 
a number of treaties, such as the extradition treaty with 
Spain, which previously had been amended piecemeal through 
three protocols and only now will be available in integrated 
form.
    Other Member States, however, opted for non-integrated 
texts, in which only the newly operative supplemental or 
replacement language is set forth and is located 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 Extradition 
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 
Extradition Agreement would not apply to them unless 
specifically stipulated. Consequently, the relevant bilateral 
instruments spell out whether extradition 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 Extradition Agreement, after exchange of notifications. 
Eighteen Member States will ratify both the U.S.-EU Extradition 
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 
Extradition 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 instrument. Three Member States viewed 
it as unnecessary to ratify even the bilateral instrument.
    Finally, in the event of termination of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement--a step that would, of course, take place 
between the Parties to this Agreement--the bilateral instrument 
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 Extradition 
Agreement.

Austria

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Austria was 
signed on July 20, 2005, and is entitled a protocol of the 1998 
U.S.-Austria Extradition Treaty. Articles 1-6 of the bilateral 
protocol incorporate six provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement into the 1998 treaty, as follows: Article 5(1) of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
requests) replaces Article 10(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 10(5); Article 7(1) 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) is added as Article 10(6); 
Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for 
transmission of supplementary information) is added as Article 
11(4); Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(requests for extradition or surrender made by several states) 
replaces Article 17; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (sensitive information in a request) is added as 
Article 11 bis.
    With respect to final provisions, Articles 7 and 8 of the 
bilateral protocol reflect the provisions of Articles 16 
(temporal application) and 22 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Belgium

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Belgium was 
signed on December 16, 2004. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral 
instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement applicable between the United States and Belgium. 
Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects 
the integrated text that shall apply between the United States 
and Belgium. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contain rules of temporal 
application, based on those set forth in Article 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1987 U.S.-Belgium Extradition 
Treaty. Seven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1987 Treaty, as follows: 
Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) replaces Article 7(1) of the 1987 
Treaty; Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(certification, authentication or legalization requirements) 
replaces Article 8; Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is added as Article 7(5); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (supplementary information) is added as 
Article 7 bis; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(requests for extradition or surrender made by several States) 
replaces Article 13; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article 6(1); and 
Article 14 (sensitive information in a request) is added as 
Article 8 bis.

Cyprus

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Cyprus was signed 
on January 20, 2006. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral instrument 
specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 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 and 4 contain rules of temporal 
application, based on those set forth in Article 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex to the instrument integrates the applicable 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement and the 1996 
U.S.-Cyprus Extradition Treaty. Seven substantive provisions of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are incorporated into the 
1996 Treaty, as follows: Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of requests) is the 
same text as the first sentence of Article 8(1) of the 1996 
Treaty; Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(certification, authentication or legalization requirements) 
replaces Article 9; Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is added to the end of Article 8(1); Article 8(2) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for submission of 
supplementary information) is added as Article 8(5)(b); Article 
10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article 14; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(capital punishment) replaces Article 6; and Article 14 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article 8(8).

Czech Republic

    The bilateral extradition instrument with the Czech 
Republic was signed on May 16, 2006, and is entitled a second 
supplementary treaty to the 1925 U.S.-Czechoslovak Extradition 
Treaty and the 1935 Supplementary Extradition Treaty. Articles 
1-5 and 7-14 of the supplementary treaty incorporate twelve 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement as follows: 
Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (extraditable 
offenses) is reflected in new formulations replacing Articles I 
and II of the 1925 Treaty; Articles 5(1) (mode of transmission 
of requests), 6 (channel of transmission of requests for 
provisional arrest) and 7(1) (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are combined into a new formulation which replaces 
Article XI(2)-(4); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (certification, authentication or legalization 
requirements) is added as Article XI(6); Article 8 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement (supplementary information) is added 
as Article XIa; Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(temporary surrender) is incorporated through a new formulation 
of Article VI(1), and the addition of Article VIa; Article 10 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for extradition 
or surrender made by several States) replaces Article VII; 
Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (simplified 
extradition procedures) is added as Article XIc; Article 12 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transit) is added as Article 
XIIa; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital 
punishment) is added as Article XIIb; and Article 14 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive information in a 
request) is added as Article XIb.
    With respect to final provisions, Articles 14, 16 and 17 of 
the bilateral supplementary treaty contain provisions on 
temporal application, entry into force and termination, based 
on those set forth in Articles 16 and 22 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement.
    Although not required by the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, 
the United States and the Czech Republic also agreed to replace 
Article IX of the 1925 Treaty (costs) with a more modern 
provision, which is set forth in Article 6 of the bilateral 
supplementary treaty. Similarly, in Article 15 of the 
supplementary treaty, the United States and the Czech Republic 
agreed to a provision on periodic consultations between the 
Parties.

Denmark

    The bilateral extradition 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 Extradition Agreement applicable between the United 
States and Denmark. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the 
agreement reflects the integrated text that shall apply between 
the United States and Denmark. Paragraph 3, in accordance with 
Article 20 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 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. Paragraph 4 contains rules of temporal application, 
based on those set forth in Article 16 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the provisions on 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1972 U.S.-Denmark Extradition 
Treaty. Eleven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement are incorporated into the 1972 Treaty as 
follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(extraditable offenses) replaces Articles 2, 3 and 4(2); 
Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) replaces Article 11(1); Article 5(2) 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (certification, 
authentication or legalization requirements) replaces Article 
11(5); Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(transmission of requests following provisional arrest) is 
added as Article 11(7); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (channel for submission of supplementary information) 
is added as Article 13(3); Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (temporary surrender) is added as Article 13 bis; 
Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article 15; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(simplified extradition procedures) is added as Article 13 ter; 
Article 12(3) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transit) is 
added as Article 18(3); Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article 8; and Article 
14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive information 
in a request) is added as Article 11(8).

Estonia

    On February 8, 2006, the United States and Estonia signed a 
new bilateral extradition treaty incorporating all of the 
requirements set forth in Articles 4-14 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement. This new treaty, which is being 
separately transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to 
ratification, serves as the instrument called for in Article 3 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Finland

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Finland was 
signed on December 16, 2004, and is entitled a protocol to the 
1976 U.S.-Finland Extradition Treaty. Paragraph 1 of the 
bilateral protocol specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement applicable between the United States and 
Finland. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the protocol 
reflects the provisions that shall be applied between the 
United States and Finland, together with the unaffected 
provisions of the 1976 Treaty. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contain rules 
of temporal application, based on those set forth in Article 16 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex sets forth the texts of provisions derived from 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement that are to be applied to the 
1976 Treaty. Eleven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement are incorporated therein, as follows: 
Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (extraditable 
offenses) replaces Articles 2 and 3(3); Article 5(1) of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
requests) replaces Article 13(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 13(5); Article 6(2) 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for transmission 
of requests for provisional arrest) is added as Article 14(4); 
Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission 
of requests following provisional arrest) is added as Article 
13(7); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(channel for submission of supplementary information) is added 
as Article 15(3); Article 9 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (temporary surrender) is added as Article 16 bis; 
Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article 18; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(simplified extradition) is added as Article 15 bis; Article 
12(3) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transit procedure 
in the event of unscheduled landing of aircraft) is added as 
Article 20(3); and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (sensitive information in a request) is added as 
Article 20 bis.

France

    The bilateral extradition instrument with France was signed 
on September 30, 2004. Paragraph A of Articles I-VII sets forth 
the text of the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
applicable between the United States and France. Paragraph B of 
Articles I-VII specifies the extent to which these provisions 
supplement or replace provisions of the 1996 U.S.-France 
Extradition Treaty, and provides other necessary explanations 
regarding the manner in which the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
is to operate. Article VIII and IX contain rules of temporal 
application, entry into force and termination based on those 
set forth in Articles 16 and 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement.
    Seven provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are 
incorporated into the 1996 Treaty as follows: Article 5(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
requests) replaces Article 10(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 11; Article 7(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) supplements the terms of Articles 
10 and 13; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(requests for extradition or surrender made by several states) 
replaces Article 17; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (simplified extradition procedures) supplements the 
terms of the 1996 Treaty; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article 7, and Article 
14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive information 
in a request) supplements the provisions of the 1996 Treaty.
    With respect to declarations under Article 19 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, France has designated the Chambre 
d'instruction de la Cour d'Appel as the competent authority 
that will decide under Article 10(2) between a U.S. request for 
extradition and a request for surrender pursuant to the 
European Arrest Warrant for the same individual.

Germany

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Germany was 
signed on April 18, 2006, and is entitled a second 
supplementary treaty to the 1978 U.S.-Germany Extradition 
Treaty and the 1986 Supplementary Extradition Treaty. Articles 
1-6 of the second supplementary treaty incorporate six U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement provisions into the existing bilateral 
extradition treaties as follows: Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 29; Article 6 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for transmission of 
requests for provisional arrest) is added as the final sentence 
of Article 16(1); Article 7 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is added as Article 16(5), with the existing Article 
16(5) being renumbered as 16(6); Article 10 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender 
made by several states) replaces Article 17; Article 13 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) replaces 
Article 12; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article 15 
bis.
    With respect to final provisions, Articles 7 and 8 of the 
second supplementary treaty reflect the provisions of Articles 
16 (temporal application) and 22 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Greece

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Greece was signed 
on January 18, 2006, and is entitled a protocol to the 1931 
U.S.-Greece Extradition Treaty and its 1937 protocol. Articles 
1 through 12 of the second protocol incorporate twelve 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement into the 
existing extradition treaties, as follows: Article 4 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (extraditable offenses) modifies 
Article I and replaces Article II; Article 5 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of requests and 
certification, authentication or legalization requirements) is 
incorporated into a formulation that replaces Article XI(2); 
Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for 
transmission of request for provisional arrest) supplements the 
provisions of Article XI; Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests following 
provisional arrest) supplements the provisions of Article XI; 
Articles 8 (supplemental information), 9 (temporary surrender), 
11 (simplified extradition procedures), 12 (transit), 13 
(capital punishment) and 14 (sensitive information in a 
request) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement generally 
supplement the provisions of the existing extradition treaties. 
Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article VII; and Article 12 of the second protocol confirms 
that other provisions of the existing treaties remain in force, 
and that the second protocol shall be interpreted consistent 
with the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    With respect to final provisions, Articles 13 and 14 of the 
bilateral protocol reflect the provisions of Article 16 
(temporal application) and 22 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Hungary

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Hungary was 
signed on November 15, 2005, and is entitled a protocol to the 
1994 U.S.-Hungary Extradition Treaty. Articles 1 through 5 of 
the bilateral protocol incorporate five articles of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement into the 1994 Treaty, as follows: Article 
5(1) and 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) are incorporated into a formulation 
that replaces Article 8(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 9; Article 8(2) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for submission of 
supplementary information) is added as Article 12(1A); Article 
10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article 15; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article 9A.
    With respect to final provisions, Articles 6 and 7 of the 
bilateral protocol reflect the provisions of Article 16 
(temporal application) and 22 (entry into force and 
termination) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Ireland

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Ireland was 
signed on July 14, 2005. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral 
instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement applicable between the United States and Ireland. 
Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects 
the integrated text that shall apply between the United States 
and Ireland. Paragraph 3 and 4 contain rules of temporal 
application, based on those set forth in Article 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1983 U.S.-Ireland Extradition 
Treaty. Ten substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1983 Treaty, as follows: 
Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) replaces Article VIII(1); Article 
5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (certification, 
authentication or legalization requirements) is added as 
Article VIII(7); Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is added as Article VIII(8); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement (channel for submission of 
supplementary information) is added as Article IX(3); Article 9 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (temporary surrender) is 
added as Article VII bis; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender made by 
several States) replaces Article XII; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (simplified extradition procedures) is 
added as Article XII bis; Article 12(3) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (transit procedure in event of 
unscheduled landing of aircraft) is added as Article XV(2); 
Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital 
punishment) replaces Article VI; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement) sensitive information is a request) is 
added as Article VIII bis.
    With respect to declarations under Article 19 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, Ireland has designated the High 
Court, or such other authority as it may designate, as the 
competent authority that will decide under Article 10(2) 
between a U.S. request for extradition and a request for 
surrender pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant for the same 
individual.

Italy

    The bilateral extradition instrument will Italy was signed 
on May 3, 2006. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral instrument 
specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 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 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1983 U.S.-Italy Extradition 
Treaty. Seven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1983 Treaty, as follows: 
Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) replaces Article X(1); Article 5(2) 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (certification, 
authentication or legalization requirements) replaces Article 
X(7); Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(transmission of requests following provisional arrest) is 
added as Article X(8); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (channel for submission of supplementary information) 
is added as Article XI(3); Article 10 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender 
made by several States) replaces Article XV; Article 13 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) replaces 
Article IX; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article XI 
bis.

Latvia

    On December 7, 2005, the United States and Latvia signed a 
new bilateral extradition treaty incorporating all of the 
requirements set forth in Articles 4-14 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement. This new treaty, which is being 
separately transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to 
ratification, serves as the instrument called for in Article 3 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

Lituania

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Lithuania was 
signed on June 15, 2005, and is entitled a protocol to the 2001 
U.S.-Lithuania Extradition Treaty. The bilateral protocol, in 
paragraph 1, specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
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 contain rules of temporal 
application, entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Articles 16 and 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 2001 Treaty. Seven substantive 
provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are 
incorporated into the 2001 Treaty as follow; Article 5(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
requests) replaces Article 8(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 9; Article 7(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests 
following provisionals arrest) is already reflected in existing 
Article 11(4); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(channel for submission of supplementary information) is added 
as Article 8 bis; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender made by 
several States) replaces Article 14; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article 7; 
and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive 
information in a request) is added as Article 8 ter.

Luxembourg

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Luxembourg was 
signed on February 1, 2005. Paragraph A of Articles I-VII sets 
forth the text of the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement applicable between the United States and Luxembourg. 
Paragraph B of Articles I-VII specifies the extent to which 
these provisions supplement or replace provisions of the 1996 
U.S.-Luxembourg Extradition Treaty, and provides other 
necessary explanations regarding the manner in which the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement is to operate. Articles VIII-IX 
contain rules of temporal application, entry into force and 
termination based on those set forth in Articles 16 and 22 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    Seven provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are 
incorporated into the 1996 Treaty as follows: Article 5(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
requests) replaces Article 8(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication of 
legalization requirements) replaces Article 10; Article 7(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) supplements the terms of Article 
8; Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel 
for submission of supplementary information) supplements the 
terms of Article 9; Article 10(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (decision on competing request for extradition by 
United States and request for surrender under the European 
Arrest Warrant) supplements Article 15; Article 13 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article 
7; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) supplements the provisions 
of the 1996 Treaty.

Malta

    On May 18, 2006, the United States and Malta signed a new 
bilateral extradition treaty incorporating all of the 
requirements set forth in Articles 4-14 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement. This new treaty, which is being 
separately transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to 
ratification, serves as the instrument called for in Article 3 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.

The Netherlands

    The bilateral extradition 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 Extradition 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, in 
accordance with Article 20 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement, provides that the instrument shall not apply to the 
Netherlands Antilles or Aruba unless the United States and the 
EU, by exchange of diplomatic notes duly confirmed by the 
Netherlands, subsequently agree to extend it application to 
them. Articles 4 and 5 contain rules of temporal application, 
based on those set forth in Article 16 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement. Article 6 contains the provisions on 
entry into force and termination, based on those set forth in 
Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1980 U.S.-Netherlands 
Extradition Treaty. Seven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement are incorporated into the 1980 Treaty, as 
follows: Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(mode of transmission of requests) replaces Article 9(1); 
Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(certification, authentication or legalization requirements) 
replaces Article 9(6); Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is added as Article 9(7); Article 8(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (channel for submission of supplementary 
information) is added as Article 10(3); Article 10 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender 
made by several States) replaces Article 14; Article 13 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) replaces 
Article 7(1); and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (sensitive information in a request) is added as 
Article 10 bis.
    In addition, by exchange of diplomatic notes 
contemporaneous with signature of the agreement, the United 
States and the Netherlands agreed that the prior exchange of 
diplomatic notes on July 11, 1991, with respect to the 
application of Article 8 of the 1980 Treaty, shall continue to 
apply to Article 8 of the Annex. The exchange of diplomatic 
notes in conjunction with signing the Agreement also confirms 
that the prior exchange of notes of December 31, 1985, apply 
the 1980 Treaty to the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba, remains 
unaffected by the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, and that the 
explanatory note to the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement also 
applies to the corresponding provisions of the Annex.

Poland

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Poland was signed 
on June 9, 2006, and is entitled an agreement. Article 1 of the 
bilateral agreement specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition 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 16 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Article 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement and the 1996 U.S.-Poland Extradition 
Treaty. Six substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are incorporated into the 1996 Treaty, as follows: 
Article 5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of 
transmission of requests) is set forth in a new formulation 
replacing Article 9(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (certification, authentication or legalization 
requirements) replaces Article 10; Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests following 
provisional arrest) is added as a new Article 12(4) (prior 
Articles 12(4) and (5) are renumbered as Articles 12(5) and 
(6)); Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests 
for extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
Article 17; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(capital punishment) replaces Article 6; and Article 14 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive information in a 
request) is added as Article 9 bis.

Portugal

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Portugal was 
signed on July 14, 2005. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral 
instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement applicable between United States and Portugal. 
Paragraph 2 provides that, in accordance with Article 2(3) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, functions allocated to 
Portugal's Justice Ministry shall be carried out by its 
Prosecutor General's Office (Procuradoria Geral da Republica). 
Paragraph 3 provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects 
the provisions that shall be applied between the United States 
and Portugal, without prejudice to provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement directly applicable. Paragraph 4 
provides, in accordance with Article 17(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement, that where the constitutional principles 
of, or final judicial decisions binding upon, the requested 
State may pose an impediment to fulfillment of its obligation 
to extradite, and neither the Annex nor the 1908 U.S.-Portugal 
Convention on Extradition resolve the matter, consultations 
shall take place. At the time of signature of the instrument, 
Portugal made a unilateral declaration stating that under 
Portuguese constitutional law impediments exist to extradition 
with respect to offenses punishable by death or by imprisonment 
for life or for an unlimited duration, and that in the event 
that extradition could accordingly only be granted in 
accordance with specific conditions considered consistent with 
its Constitution, Portugal would invoke Paragraph 4 of the 
bilateral instrument. Paragraphs 5 and 6 contain rules of 
temporal application, based on those set forth in Article 16 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 7 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex sets forth the texts of provisions derived from 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement that are to be applied to the 
1908 Treaty. Eleven substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement are incorporated therein, as follows: 
Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (extraditable 
offenses) modifies Article I and replaces Article II; Article 
5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission 
of requests) and Article 7(1) (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) replace Article XI(2); Articles 
5(2) (certification, authentication or legalization 
requirements), 6 (channel for transmission of requests for 
provisional arrest), 8 (supplementary information), and 9 
(temporary surrender) supplement the provisions of the 1908 
Treaty; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(requests for extradition or surrender made by several States) 
replaces Article VII; and Articles 11 (simplified extradition), 
12 (transit), and 14 (sensitive information in a request) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement supplement the provisions of 
the 1908 Treaty.
    With respect to declarations under Article 19 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, Portugal has designated its competent 
judicial authority as the authority that will decide under 
Article 10(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement between a 
U.S. request for extradition and a request for surrender 
pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant for the same 
individual.

Slovak Republic

    The bilateral extradition instrument with the Slovak 
Republic was signed on February 6, 2006. Paragraph 1 of the 
bilateral instrument specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement applicable between the United States and 
the Slovak Republic. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex to the 
instrument reflects the integrated text that shall apply 
between the United States and the Slovak Republic. Paragraphs 3 
and 4 contain rules of temporal application, based on those set 
forth in Article 16 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. 
Article 5 contains the provisions on entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Article 22 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement with the 1925 U.S.-Czechoslovakia 
Extradition Treaty and the 1935 Supplementary Extradition 
Treaty. Twelve substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement are incorporated, as follows: Article 4 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (extraditable offenses) is 
reflected through the modification of Article I and replacement 
of Article II; Articles 5(1) (mode of transmission of requests) 
and 7(1) (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are combined into 
a new formulation which replaces former Article XI (numbered in 
the Annex as Article XII(2)); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) is added as Article XII(6); Article 
6 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel of transmission 
of requests for provisional arrest) is added as Article XII(3); 
Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (supplementary 
information) is added as Article XIII; Article 9 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (temporary surrender) is reflected in the 
modification of Article VI and the addition of Article VII: 
Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests for 
extradition or surrender made by several States) replaces 
former Article VII of the existing treaty (numbered in the 
Annex as Article VIII); Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (simplified extradition procedures) is added as 
Article XV; Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(transit) is added as Article XVII; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) is added as Article 
XVIII; and Article 14 of U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article XIV.
    Although not required by the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement, 
the United States and the Slovak Republic also agreed to revise 
Articles IV (rule of specialty), X (costs), and XII (4) 
(provisional arrest) of the 1925 Treaty to provide for more 
modern formulae, and to make minor numbering and terminological 
modifications in the Annex.

Slovenia

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Slovenia was 
signed on October 17, 2005, and is entitled an agreement. 
Paragraph 1 of the bilateral agreement specifies the articles 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement applicable between the 
United States and Slovenia. Paragraph 2 provides that the Annex 
to the agreement reflects the provisions that shall be applied 
between the United States and Slovenia. Paragraphs 3 and 4 
contain rules of temporal application, based on those set forth 
in Article 16 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 
contains the provisions on entry into force and termination, 
based on those set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex sets forth the texts of provisions derived from 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement that are to be applied to the 
1901 U.S.-Serbia Extradition Treaty currently in force between 
the United States and Slovenia. Twelve substantive provisions 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement are incorporated therein, 
as follows: Article 4 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(extraditable offenses) modifies Article 1 and replaces Article 
2; Articles 5(1) (mode of transmission of requests) and 7(1) 
(transmission of requests following provisional arrest) of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement replace Article 3(1); Article 
5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (certification, 
authentication or legalization requirements) replaces Article 
3(3); Article 6 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel 
for transmission of requests for provisional arrest) replaces 
Article 4(1); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(supplementary information) is added as Article 3 bis; Article 
9 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (temporary surrender) is 
added as Article 10 bis; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender made by 
several States) replaces Article 10; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (simplified extradition) is added as 
Article 10 ter; Article 12 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(transit) is added as Article 11 bis; Article 13 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (capital punishment) is added as Article 
8 bis; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article 3 ter.
    With respect to declarations under Article 19 of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, Slovenia has designated the Supreme 
Court of the Republic of Slovenia, or such other authority as 
the Republic of Slovenia may subsequently designate, as the 
competent authority that will decide under Article 10(2) of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement between a U.S. request for 
extradition and a request for surrender pursuant to the 
European Arrest Warrant for the same individual.

Spain

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Spain was signed 
on December 17, 2004. The bilateral instrument, in paragraph 1, 
specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
applicable between the U.S. and Spain. Paragraph 2 provides 
that the Annex to the instrument reflects the integrated text 
that shall apply between the U.S. and Spain, and paragraphs 3-5 
contain rules of temporal application, entry into force and 
termination based on those set forth in Articles 16 and 22 of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, and the U.S.-Spain Extradition Treaty 
signed May 29, 1970, the Supplementary Treaty signed January 
25, 1975, the Second Supplementary Treaty signed February 9, 
1988, and the Third Supplementary Treaty signed March 12, 1996. 
Eight substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement are incorporated therein as follows: Article 5(1) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of 
request) replaces Article X(A); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (certification, authentication or 
legalization requirements) replaces Article X(F); Article 7(1) 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission of requests 
following provisional arrest) is added as Article X(H); Article 
8(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for 
submission of supplementary information) is added as Article 
XII, third paragraph; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (requests for extradition or surrender made by 
several States) replaces Article XIV; Article 12 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (transit) is added as Article XV bis; 
Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (capital 
punishment) replaces Article VII; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (sensitive information in a request) is 
added as Article X bis.
    In addition, at the time of signature of the instrument, 
Spain declared that if the requesting State does not accept the 
conditions set forth in Article 13 (capital punishment) of the 
U.S.-EU Agreement, extradition shall not be granted.

Sweden

    The bilateral extradition instrument with Sweden was signed 
on December 16, 2004. Paragraph 1 of the bilateral instrument 
specifies the articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
applicable between the United States and Sweden. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects the 
integrated text that shall apply between the United States and 
Sweden. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contain rules of temporal 
application, based on those set forth in Article 16 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. Paragraph 5 contains the 
provisions on entry into force and termination, based on those 
set forth in Article 22 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates the applicable provisions of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement, the 1961 U.S.-Sweden Extradition 
Convention and the 1983 U.S.-Sweden Supplementary Convention. 
Ten substantive provisions of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
are incorporated therein, as follows: Article 5(1) of the U.S.-
EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission of requests) 
replaces Article X(1); Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (certification, authentication or legalization 
requirements) replaces Articles X(5); Article 6 of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement (alternative channel for transmission of 
requests for provisional arrest) is added to Article XIII(1); 
Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (transmission 
of requests following provisional arrest) is added as Article 
X(7); Article 8 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(submission of supplementary information) is added as Article 
XII; Article 10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (requests 
for extradition or surrender made by several States) is added 
as Article XVI; Article 11 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(simplified extradition procedures) is added as Article XVII; 
Article 12(3) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (procedures 
for transit in the event of unscheduled landing of aircraft) is 
added as Article XV(3); Article 13 of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (capital punishment) replaces Article VII; and 
Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (sensitive 
information in a request) ia added as Article XI.

United Kingdom

    The bilateral extradition instrument with the United 
Kingdom was signed on December 16, 2004. The instrument 
foresees the entry into force of the 2003 U.S.-U.K. Extradition 
Treaty prior to, or contemporaneous with, the entry into force 
of the instrument.
    The bilateral instrument, in paragraph 1, specifies the 
articles of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement applicable 
between the United States and the United Kingdom. Paragraph 2 
provides that the Annex to the instrument reflects the 
integrated text that shall apply between the United States and 
the United Kingdom. Paragraph 3, in accordance with Article 20 
of the U.S.-EU Extradition 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 2003 Treaty applies. Paragraphs 4 and 
5 contain rules of temporal application, based on those set 
forth in Article 16 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement. 
Paragraph 6 contains the provisions on entry into force and 
termination, based on those set forth in Article 22 of the 
U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement.
    The Annex integrates six provisions of the U.S.-EU 
Extradition Agreement into the 2003 Treaty, as follows: Article 
5(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (mode of transmission 
of requests) is incorporated through Articles 8(1) and 12(4); 
Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(certification, authentication or legalization requirements) 
replaces Article 9; Article 7(1) of the U.S.-EU Extradition 
Agreement (transmission of requests following provisional 
arrest) is incorporated through Article 12(4); Article 8(2) of 
the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (channel for submission of 
supplementary information) is added as Article 10(2); Article 
10 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement (decision on competing 
request for extradition by United States and request for 
surrender under the European Arrest Warrant) replaces Article 
15; and Article 14 of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(sensitive information in a request) is added as Article 8 bis.
    In addition, upon signature of the bilateral instrument, 
the United States and United Kingdom exchanged diplomatic notes 
stating that Article 5(2) of the U.S.-EU Extradition Agreement 
(certification, authentication or legalization requirements) 
will not be applied until such time as the United Kingdom 
enacts enabling legislation for that purpose. Until then, the 
Parties shall apply Article 9 of the 2003 Treaty.


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]