PAPUA NEW GUINEA Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom, signed at London December 22, 1931, made applicable to Australia (including Papua, Norfolk Island, and the mandated territories of New Guinea and Nauru), in accordance with art. 14, from August 30, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122, 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. PARAGUAY Treaty on extradition. Signed at Asuncion May 24, 1973; entered into force May 7, 1974. 25 UST 967; TIAS 7838. PERU Treaty providing for the extradition of criminals. Signed at Lima November 28, 1899; entered into force February 22, 1901. 31 Stat. 1921; 10 Bevans 1074; TS 288. POLAND Extradition treaty and accompanying protocol. Signed at Warsaw November 22, 1927; entered into force July 6, 1929. 46 Stat. 2282; 11 Bevans 206; 92 LNTS 101; TS 789. Supplementary extradition treaty. Signed at Warsaw April 5, 1935; entered into force June 5, 1936. 49 Stat. 3394; 11 Bevans 265; 170 LNTS 287; TS 908. PORTUGAL Extradition convention and exchange of notes concerning the death penalty. 12 Signed at Washington May 7, 1908; entered into force November 14, 1908. 35 Stat. 2071; 11 Bevans 314; TS 512. ROMANIA Extradition treaty. Signed at Bucharest July 23, 1924; entered into force April 7, 1925. 44 Stat. 2020; 11 Bevans 391; TS 713. Supplementary extradition treaty. Signed at Bucharest November 10, 1936; entered into force July 27, 1937. 50 Stat. 1349; 11 Bevans 423; 1818 LNTS 177; TS 916. SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS Extradition treaty, with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. SAINT LUCIA Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES Extradition treaty, between the United States and the United Kingdom, with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. SAN MARINO Treaty for mutual extradition of fugitive criminals. Signed at Rome January 10, 1906; entered into force July 8, 1908. 35 Stat. 1971; 11 Bevans 440; TS 495. Supplementary extradition convention. Signed at Washington October 10, 1934; entered into force June 28, 1935. 49 Stat. 3198; 11 Bevans 446; 161 LNTS 149; TS 891. SEYCHELLES Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. 12 Applicable to all territories. SIERRA LEONE Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. SINGAPORE Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. Agreement confirming the continuance in force between the United States and Singapore of December 22, 1931 extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Exchange of notes at Singapore April 23 and June 10, 1969; entered into force June 10, 1969. 20 UST 2764; 723 UNTS 201; TIAS 6744. SOLOMON ISLANDS Extradition treaty, between the United States and the United Kingdom, with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. SOUTH AFRICA Treaty relating to the reciprocol extradition of criminals.13 Signed at Washington December 18, 1947; entered into force April 30, 1951. 2 UST 884; 148 UNTS 85; TIAS 2243. SPAIN Treaty on extradition. 14 Signed at Madrid May 29, 1970; entered into force June 16, 1971. 22 UST 737; 796 UNTS 245; TIAS 7136. Supplementary treaty on extradition. Signed at Madrid January 25, 1975; entered into force June 2, 1978. 29 UST 2283; TIAS 8938. SRI LANKA (FORMERLY CEYLON) Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. SURINAME Convention between the United States and the Netherlands for the extradition of criminals. Signed at Washington June 2, 1887; entered into force July 11, 1889. 26 Stat. 1481; 10 Bevans 47; TS 256. Treaty extending the extradition convention of June 2, 1887, between the United States and the Netherlands to their respective island possessions and colonies. Signed at Washington January 18, 1904; entered into force August 28, 1904. 33 Stat. 2257; 10 Bevans 53; TS 436. SWAZILAND Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122, TS 849; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59. Agreement continuing into force between the United States and Swaziland the extradition treaty of December 22, 1932 (47 Stat. 2122), between the United States and the United Kingdom. Exchange of notes at Mbabane May 13 and July 28, 1970; entered into force July 28, 1970. 21 UST 1930; 756 UNTS 103; TIAS 6934. SWEDEN Supplementary convention on extradition. Signed at Stockholm March 14, 1983; entered into force September 24, 1984. 13 Applicable to all territories. 14 Protocol terminated January 1, 1965. 50-408 0-85-2 SWITZERLAND Extradition treaty. Signed at Washington May 14, 1900; entered into force March 29, 1901. 31 Stat. 1928; 11 Bevans 904; TS 354. Supplementary extradition treaty. Signed at Washington January 10, 1935; entered into force May 16, 1935. 49 Stat. 3192; 11 Bevans 924; 159 LNTS 243; TS 889. Supplementary extradition treaty. Signed at Bern January 31, 1940; entered into force April 8, 1941. 55 Stat. 1140; 11 Bevans 938; TS 969. TANZANIA Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom.15 Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. THAILAND Treaty for the extradition of fugitives from justice. Signed at Bangkok December 30, 1922; entered into force March 24, 1924. 43 Stat. 1749; 11 Bevans 1008; 25 LNTS 394; TS 681. TONGA Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into force June 24, 1935; applicable to Tonga August 1, 1966. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. Agreement continuing in force between the United States and Tonga the extradition treaty of December 22, 1931 between the United States and the United Kingdom. Exchange of notes at Nuku'alofa and Wellington March 14 and April 13, 1977; entered into force April 13, 1977. 28 UST 5290; TIAS 8628. TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom. Signed at London December 22, 1931; applicable to Trinidad and Tobago June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122; 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. TURKEY Treaty on extradition and mutual assistance in criminal matters. Signed at Ankara June 7, 1979. Entered into force January 1, 1981. TIAS 9892. TUVALU Extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom, with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. UNITED KINGDOM Extradition treaty, with protocol of signature and exchange of notes. 16 Signed at London June 8, 1972; entered into force January 21, 1977. 28 UST 227; TIAS 8468. URUGUAY Treaty on extradition and cooperation in penal matters. Signed at Washington April 6, 1973. Entered into force April 11, 1984. VENEZUELA Treaty of extradition, and additional article. Signed at Caracas January 19 and 21, 1922; entered into force April 14,1923. 43 Stat. 1698; 12 Bevans 1129; 49 LNTS 435; TS 675. 15 Treaty continued in force between the United States and Tanzania by exchange of notes of November 30, and December 6, 1965; 16 UST 2066; 592 UNTS 53; TIAS 5946. 16 Applicable to: all U.S. territories; Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Bermuda, British Indian Ocean Territory, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands and Dependencies, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands, Anguilla, St. Helena and Dependencies, Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia in the Island of Cyprus, Turks and Caicos Islands. YUGOSLAVIA Extradition treaty. Signed at Belgrade October 25, 1901; entered into force June 12, 1902. 32 Stat. 1890; 12 Bevans 1238; TS 406. ZAMBIA Extradition treaty. Signed at London December 22, 1931; entered into June 24, 1935. 47 Stat. 2122, 12 Bevans 482; 163 LNTS 59; TS 849. Mr. SOLARZ. Are there many countries with which we don't have extradition treaties? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. Mr. SOLARZ. Have we ever requested countries in the past with which we don't have extradition treaties, to deliver people who have been charged in the American judicial system with crimes to the United States? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. Mr. SOLARZ. So, this is by no means an unprecedented request? Mr. BROWN. No, sir. Mr. SOLARZ. Are you in a position to let us know if there are any Governments elsewhere in the world with which we have not had extradition treaties that have ever responded to requests for the deliverance of their nationals to the United States? Have they complied with that request? Mr. BROWN. Could I call on Mr. Surena, sir? Mr. SOLARZ. Yes. Mr. SURENA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The information we have been able to gather in a short period of time indicates that there are a number of States which, from time to time, have agreed to a request of ours to see, to facilitate someone's return who is a fugitive from the United States other than through the formal procedure of extradition. As I was saying, our brief research indicates there have been a number of States which have from time to time agreed to return to us individuals either by way of deportation, expulsion, refusal of entry, who are wanted in the United States as fugitives. Mr. SOLARZ. Even in the absence of extradition treaties. Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir; if I may add, a practice and I think our people in the Department of Justice could speak to this more to your satisfaction-but a practice of law enforcement officials even in those cases in which we do have extradition treaties, is to consult with the foreign justice ministry officials to see whether a method short of extradition may succeed in having the person returned. If I may specifically refer to your point, our research in this brief period of time has not indicated to us any cases in which a foreign country, whether or not we have an extradition treaty with it, has consented to this kind of facilitative assistance with respect to one of its own nationals. Mr. SOLARZ. Then who have they returned to us were American nationals? Mr. BROWN. And third country nationals. Mr. SOLARZ. Now, Mr. Brown, why don't we have an extradition treaty with Taiwan? Mr. BROWN. I am not sure of the full history, Mr. Chairman, but I will examine that. I just don't have much of a record. I can say that during my present watch over the past 2 years, approaches have been made on the CCNAA-AIT network for an extradition treaty or the equivalent thereof. You would understand in the present circumstances I would characterize them as unusual in the sense that we do not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan and the question would then arise as to the U.S. Senate passing on a treaty involving an entity with which we do not have diplomatic relations. Mr. SOLARZ. Is it the position of the Department that as a matter of policy the United States does not enter into extradition treaties with governments that we do not have diplomatic relations with? Mr. BROWN. I can't ennunciate a position on that. Mr. SOLARZ. Let me ask you this. What would be your position with respect to the desirability of an agreement between AIT and CCNAA, which wouldn't have the status of a treaty, in the sense that it would not require ratification by the Senate but would provide for extradition under mutually agreed upon circumstances? Would you be in favor of or opposed to such an agreement? Mr. BROWN. I think that such a subject we would have to look at very carefully. It takes me into a legalistic thicket, Mr. Chairman, for which I presently am a bit concerned. Mr. SOLARZ. Now, we requested an opportunity to interview the accused Chen and Wu in Taiwan? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. Mr. SOLARZ. Have we been given that opportunity? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir; Chen and Wu have been examined by specialists with polygraphs. Mr. SOLARZ. And have we requested an opportunity to have the FBI interview Admiral Wang and his associates in the Bureau of Military Intelligence who have been remanded by the Taiwanese authorities because of their alleged involvement in this affair? If we haven't, are we considering making such a request? Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, you are asking a question about the possible conduct of the investigation that I am reluctant to answer in open session. As you can see, we are willing to inform you of what has been accomplished, but I would prefer to avoid discussing what further investigative plans are under consideration. Perhaps I might respectfully submit that you wish to direct that question to our law enforcement agencies. Mr. SOLARZ. You are aware of the amendment that was adopted to the Arms Export Control Act a few years ago? Mr. BROWN. I am. Mr. SOLARZ. It was enacted following the murder of Chen Wencheng in Taiwan. It prohibits arms sales to countries that engage in a consistent pattern of harassment and intimidation. Do you believe that the Government of Taiwan had engaged in anything that |