Home Recommended Products Contact Us
Home
Resources & Links
Fatherlessness Statistics
Child Support
Legal Resources
Search This Site
Bad Judges List
Free Templates
Restraining Orders
Judicial Abuse Stories
Father's Stories
Legal Help & Referrals
Constitutional Rights
Donate
Table of Contents
Terms & Conditions
Signup for Newsletter
E-mail:  
Search Site
EXTRADITION TREATIES INTERPRETATION ACT OF 1997

(Senate - October 23, 1997)

[Page: S11168]  GPO's PDF

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 196, S. 1266.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (S. 1266) to interpret the term `kidnapping' in extradition treaties to which the United States is a party.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

AMENDMENT NO. 1523

(PURPOSE: TO PROVIDE SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE FOR THE TEXT OF THE BILL)

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, Senator Helms has a substitute amendment at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Lott], for Mr. Helms, for himself, and Mr. Biden, proposes an amendment No. 1523.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Extradition Treaties Interpretation Act of 1997'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--

(1) each year, several hundred children are kidnapped by a parent in violation of law, court order, or legally binding agreement and brought to, or taken from, the United States;

(2) until the mid-1970's, parental abduction generally was not considered a criminal offense in the United States;

(3) since the mid-1970's, United States criminal law has evolved such that parental abduction is now a criminal offense in each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia;

(4) in enacting the International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-173; 107 Stat. 1998; 18 U.S.C. 1204), Congress recognized the need to combat parental abduction by making the act of international parental kidnapping a Federal criminal offense;

(5) many of the extradition treaties to which the United States is a party specifically list the offenses that are extraditable and use the word `kidnapping', but it has been the practice of the United States not to consider the term to include parental abduction because these treaties were negotiated by the United States prior to the development in United States criminal law described in paragraphs (3) and (4);

(6) the more modern extradition treaties to which the United States is a party contain dual criminality provisions, which provide for extradition where both parties make the offense a felony, and therefore it is the practice of the United States to consider such treaties to include parental abduction if the other foreign state party also considers the act of parental abduction to be a criminal offense; and

(7) this circumstance has resulted in a disparity in United States extradition law which should be rectified to better protect the interests of children and their parents.

SEC. 3. INTERPRETATION OF EXTRADITION TREATIES.
For purposes of any extradition treaty to which the United States is a party, Congress authorizes the interpretation of the terms `kidnaping' and `kidnapping' to include parental kidnapping.
 

Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate is today acting on the Extradition Treaties Interpretation Act. I appreciate the cooperation of the chairman of the committee, and the cooperation and assistance of the executive branch, in moving this bill forward.

The bill is very short, and I will not take the Senate's time to review it at length. In brief, the bill is designed to remedy a disparity in U.S. extradition law and practice. The disparity is this: under certain extradition treaties, the crime of parental abduction--when one parent takes a child in violation of law or a custody order and against the wishes of the other parent--is not extraditable. That is so for two related reasons.

The criminalization of parental abduction is a relatively recent development in U.S. criminal law. Prior to the mid-1970's, parental abduction was generally considered a family law matter not covered by criminal law. In the last two decades or so, U.S. criminal law has evolved significantly. All 50 states make the act a crime, as does the District of Columbia and the Federal Government.

As a consequence of this development in the law, a disparity has been created in U.S. extradition law. The disparity occurs in a subset of extradition treaties referred to as `list' treaties--so named because they specifically enumerate, or list, the crimes under the treaty that are considered extraditable. Thus, because the act of parental abduction was not a crime when these older list treaties were ratified, it has been the practice of the executive branch to interpret the treaties as excluding parental abduction. This concern does not arise in more modern `dual criminality' treaties, which avoid the limiting nature of the list treaties by allowing extradition in any case where both countries make a practice a felony.

Seeking to remove this disparity, the Clinton administration has requested authority to adopt a new interpretation of the term `kidnapping' in the list treaties so that it encompasses parental abduction. The Foreign Relations Committee strongly supports this request, and voted unanimously last month to report the bill to the Senate.

The chairman and I have offered a substitute amendment which makes several changes to the Committee-reported bill which were recommended by the Justice Department after it gave closer review to the legislation. The changes are modest, and mostly technical. I would highlight only one: the committee-reported bill provided, in the operative section of the bill, section 3, that the Congress authorizes the interpretation of the term kidnapping to include international parental kidnapping. The substitute omits the word `international,' for an important reason: the crime of international parental abduction, which includes as an element the taking of a child out of the country, is a Federal offense. But the practical reality is that most extradition cases will involve crimes prosecuted at the state level, where the offense does not include the aforementioned element of removing the child from the country. Thus, the substitute ensures that the bill has the broadest possible reach.

Mr. President, the abduction of children by their parents is a heartwrenching crime. This bill will ensure that there is no disparity in U.S. extradition law and practice with regard to this crime, and, I hope, will help lead to the extradition of individuals wanted for this crime. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

[Page: S11169]  GPO's PDF

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the amendment be agreed to.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment (No. 1523) was agreed to.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, as amended; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The bill (S. 1266), as amended, was read the third time and passed.
 

Other Pages on Parental Kidnapping

Father Tries to Get Sons Back From the Philippines

Using the Criminal Justice System - Child Abduction by a Parent

EXTRADITION TREATIES INTERPRETATION ACT OF 1997

What We're Doing Now About Child Abduction

Custody and Visitation Index Page