BILATERAL IMMUNITY AGREEMENTS
(So-called "Article 98 Agreements")
What is a bilateral immunity agreement (BIA)?
Bilateral immunity agreements (BIAs), otherwise referred to as Article 98
agreements, prohibit states that are party to the International Criminal Court
(ICC) from sending any U.S. personnel to the Court. Under BIAs, “U.S. personnel” includes U.S.
servicemembers, nationals, or employees of the U.S. government (past and
present, including non-national contractors). The term "Article 98 agreement"
refers to the provision of the Rome Statute establishing the International
Criminal Court that prohibits the Court from prosecuting someone located within an ICC
member state if doing so would cause the member state to violate the terms of
other bilateral or multilateral treaties to which it may be a party.
Since the summer of 2002, the Bush administration has
aggressively sought to conclude bilateral immunity agreements with every country
in the world. As of October 2005, Citizens for Global Solutions has been able to
verify that the United States has entered into BIAs with 97 countries. However,
of the 99 ICC member states, 49 have refused to sign a BIA because they believe
that doing so would breach their legal obligations under the Rome Statute. (More
on the legal debate.)
What happens if a country refuses to sign a BIA?
By refusing to sign a BIA, many U.S. allies have lost their U.S. military aid
and are at risk of losing additional economic support funds. Countries are at risk of
losing U.S. aid because of two provisions attached to U.S. appropriations
legislation, the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act and the Nethercutt
provision.
Under the
American Servicemembers'
Protection Act (ASPA), which originally passed with the Fiscal Year 2003
appropriations bill, countries that belong to the ICC are no longer eligible for
U.S. military assistance unless they are explicitly exempted in the ASPA
legislation, the
President waives the requirement for national security reasons, or the President
waives the requirement because the countries have concluded a BIA with the U.S.
The countries exempted under ASPA include all NATO countries in addition to
Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco,
New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand.
Under the
Nethercutt Amendment, originally passed as part of the Fiscal Year 2005
appropriations bill, countries that belong to the ICC are not eligible for U.S.
economic support funds unless they are statutorily exempted, the President
waives the requirement for national security reasons, or the President waives
the requirement because the countries have concluded a BIA with the U.S. The
countries exempted under Nethercutt include all NATO countries, Argentina,
Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea.
Have any countries received presidential waivers under
ASPA or Nethercutt?
Citizens for Global Solutions has not been able to verify the use of
presidential waivers under the Nethercutt provision. However, President Bush has
granted waivers to at least 32 ICC member states that receive U.S. military assistance
and have signed BIAs. In late November 2003, President Bush partially waived the
sanctions for Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and Slovakia, even
though all six have refused to sign BIAs. (All six have since become full
members of NATO and are fully exempt from the sanctions.) This still leaves more
than 20 U.S. allies without military assistance.
Which key U.S. allies are at risk of losing military or
economic support aid?
Among the countries whose assistance is being withheld are the following:
-
Latin American allies in the war on drugs,
including Peru, Ecuador, Paraguay,
Brazil, Venezuela, Costa Rica, and Uruguay.
-
The Balkan countries of Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro, which rely on U.S. military assistance to maintain stability and reform their armies.
-
Caribbean countries, whose hurricane disaster assistance is tied to the affected programs: Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados,
and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
-
African allies with which the U.S. partners to
help maintain regional security, including South Africa, Kenya, Mali and Tanzania.
Updated October 18, 2005
+ TAKE ACTION
|
|
Congress considers negative impact of BIAs
-Op-ed
by Raj Purohit and
Golzar Kheiltash
-Testimony
of Citizens for
Global Solutions before the
Senate Committee for Armed
Services regarding the
negative impact of BIAs
U.S. Institutes More Sanctions on ICC Member
States: A Synopsis
2006 BIA Database
AT-A-GLANCE SUMMARY OF COUNTRIES THAT HAVE
SIGNED BIAs
(PDF version)
THE AMERICAN SERVICEMEMBERS' PROTECTION ACT
(U.S. restrictions on military aid)
THE NETHERCUTT AMENDMENT
(U.S. restrictions
on economic support funds)
DO BIAs VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL LAW?
SANCTIONING ALLIES: EFFECTS OF THE BUSH
ADMINISTRATION'S ARTICLE 98 CAMPAIGN
(PDF version)
FORMAL POSITIONS OF U.S. ALLIES ON BIAs
|