CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 51
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 28
• Publication Date: July 30, 1965
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
HEARING
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXECUTIVE D, 88TH CONGRESS, 2D SESSION
JULY 30, 1965
0
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
51-0.10 WASHINGTON : 1965
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
J. W. FULBRIGIIT, Arkansas, Chairman
JOHN SPARKMAN, Alabama
MIKE MANSFIELD, Montana
WAYNE MORSE, Oregon
RUSSELL B. LONG, Loulslana
ALBERT GORE, Tennessee
FRANK J. LAUSCHE, Ohio
FRANK CHURCH, Idaho
STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
THOMAS J. DODD, Connecticut
JOSEPH S. CLARK, Pennsylvania
CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island
EUGENE J. McCARTHY, Minnesota
BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER, Iowa
GEORGE D. AIKEN, Vermont
FRANK CARLSON, Kansas
JOHN J. WILLIAMS, Delaware
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota
CLIFFORD P. CASE, New Jersey
CARL MARC!, Ohle/ of Staff
DARRELL, ST. CLAIRE, Clerk
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF
Dave, Richard H., Acting Assistant Secretary Bureau of ''European Affairs
Depa,rtment of State -------------------- ----------=-------------
Page
17
MacArthur, Douglas, II, Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional
Relations------------
Meeker, Leonard C., Legal Adviser, Department of State---------------
17
Rusk, Hon. Dean, Secretary of State------------------..--------------
17
INSERTIONS FOR THE RECORD
Consular Convention with Russia-Message from the President---------
'
3
Travel
by touristy and exchange visitors between the United States and
the U.S.S. R. for the past 5 years- ----------------------------------
32
Memorandum from Leonard Meeker to Committee on Foreign Relations-
45
iii
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
(Executive D, 88th Cong., 2d Sess.)
FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1965
UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS,
Washington, D.C.
The committee met pursuant to notice, at 10:05 o'clock, in room
4221, New Senate Office Building, Senator J. W. Fulbright (chair-
man). presiding.
Present: Senators Fulbright, 'Gore, Symington, Clark, Hicken-
looper, Aiken, and Case.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
The committee is meeting this morning to hear the Honorable Dean
Rusk, Secretary of State, testify on the consular convention between
the Soviet Union and the United States. The convention and a pro-
tocol relating to it was signed at Moscow on June ti 19641 by Ambas-
sador Kohler for the Government of the United States and Foreign
Minister Gromyko for the Government of the Union of Soviet Social-
ist Republics.
The committee held an executive hearing on July 12, 1965, to hear
the testimony of Mr. Leonard Meeker, Legal Adviser of the Depart-
ment of State, and Mr. Richard Davis, Acting Assistant Secretary of
State for European Affairs.
The commitee met in executive session July 20, 1965, to consider
the convention and decided at that time to take it up formally and sub-
mit it to the Senate for its advice and consent.
PURPOSE OF CONSULAR TREATY
It is the committee's understanding that the treaty is in most re-.
spects a normal consular convention. It is also our understanding that
this treaty contains certain extraordinary provisions for the protection
of American citizens and consular officials in the Soviet Union which
are not normally included in consular conventions.
The committee would be pleased to hear your comments, Mr. Sec-.
retary, on these special provisions for the protection of Americans in
the Soviet Union and how they might be expected to operate.
There has been some uncertainty as to whether this treaty will
actually be followed by the opening of consulates and as to how many
and where they might be. It is our understanding that the treaty
sells out the conditions under which consular relations might be con-
dpucted and defines the rights and status of consular personnel, but it
has no direct bearing on the actual establishment of consulates.
1
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
2 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
We are advised that consulates can be established now if the two
Governments so desire, even in the absence of a consular treaty.
We would appreciate having your comments on these and any other
matters pertaining to the treaty which you consider appropriate.
Senator I.Iickenlooper ?
Senator IIICICENI,oorER. I want to correct a misunderstanding. I
understood you to say in the opening statement that the committee
had decided to submit this to the Senate for confirmation.
The CHAIRMAN. We will proceed with hearings with a view to pre-
senting it to the committee. The committee would have to vote on it
after we have had committee hearings.
Senator IIIKNUioPER. That is what I thought but the state-
ment was that the committee had met and decided to submit it to the
Senate for confirmation.
The CHAIRMAN. The consular convention referred to will be in-
serted in the record at this point.
(The consular convention follows:)
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
88TH CONGRESS SENATE J EXECUTIVE
2d Session D
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH RUSSIA
MESSAGE
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
A CONSULAR CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA AND THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS,
TOGETHER WITH A PROTOCOL RELATING THERETO, SIGNED
AT MOSCOW ON JUNE 1, 1964
JUNE 12 (legislative day, MARCH 30), 1964.-Convention was read the first time
and, together with the message and accompanying papers, was referred to the
Committee on Foreign Relations and was ordered to be printed for use of the
Senate
THE WHITE HOUSE, June 12, 1964.
To the Senate of the United States:
With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to
ratification, I transmit herewith a consular convention between the
United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
together with a protocol relating thereto, signed at Moscow on June 1,
1964.
I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, the report by
the Acting Secretary of State with respect to the convention.
I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration
to the convention and protocol submitted herewith and give its advice
and consent to their ratification.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON.
(Enclosures: (1) Report of the Acting Secretary of State; (2) con-
sular convention with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, with
,protocol, signed at Moscow June 1, 1964.)
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
4 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington.
THE PRESIDENT,
The White House:
The undersigned, the Acting Secretary of State, has the honor to
lay before the President, with a view to its transmission to the Senate
to receive the advice and conselit of that body to ratification, if the
President approves thereof, a consular convention between the United
States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, to-
gether with a protocol relating thereto, signed at Moscow on June 1,
1964.
The convention is the result of intermittent discussions since 1933,
preliminary negotiating discussions in 1960, and a continuing series of
negotiation sessions since last August. Its provisions, like: consular
provisions in force between the United States and many other coun-
tries, are designed to regulate the consular affairs of each country
in the territory of the other country and to formalize, so far as prac-
ticable, the understandings of the two countries in regard to the
treatment to be accorded consular officials and employees. The
convention covers such matters as the status of a consular establish-
ment, the duties and functions of consular officers, and the rights,
privileges, and immunities of the consular personnel of each country
stationed in the territory of the other country. More specifically, the
convention contains provisions relating to definitions (art. 1); opening
of consular establishments and appointment of consular officers and
employees (arts. 2 through 6); consular functions (arts. 7 through 15);
and rights, privileges, and immunities (arts. 16 through 29). The
protocol, which constitutes an integral part of the convention, con-
strues and amplifies certain provisions of the convention.
Most of the provisions of the convention are similar in substance to
provisions in consular convention between the United States and other
countries.
Special reference is made to certain provisions of the convention
which represent a significant advance in protection for U.S. citizens
in the Soviet Union, as follows:
Article 12, paragraph 2, provides that authorities of the receiving
state shall immediately inform a consular officer of the sending state
of the arrest or detention in other form of a national of the sending
state, and paragraph I of the protocol provides that such notification
shall take place within 1 to 3 days from the time of arrest or deten-
tion, depending on conditions of communication.
Article 12, paragraph 3, provides that a consular officer of the send-
ing state shall have the right without delay to visit and communicate
with a national of the sending state who is under arrest or otherwise
detained in custody or is serving a sentence of imprisonment, and
paragraphs 2 and 3 of the protocol provide that such rights shall be
accorded within 2 to 4 days of the arrest or detention of such national,
depending upon his location, and shall be accorded on a continuing
basis.
Article 19, paragraph 2, provides that consular officers and em-
ployees who are nationals of the sending state shall be immune from
the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state. This paragraph will
insure the security of U.S. Government consular personnel in the
Soviet Union.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 5
Provisions of the convention other than those to which special
reference is made in the preceding paragraphs are similar in sub-
stance to provisions in consular conventions between the United
States and other countries. For example, article 10 of the conven-
tion, which contains provisions regarding competency and authority
of consular officers in connection with the settlement of estates, is
almost identical to article 6 of the convention with Korea signed on
January 8, 1963 (TIAS 5469; S. Ex. B, 88th Cong., 1st sess.), and
article 18 of the convention with Japan signed on March 22, 1963
(S. Ex. I, 88th Cong., 1st sess.).
Article 30 provides that the convention shall be subject to ratifica-
tion, that the ratifications shall be exchanged at 'Washington, that the
convention shall enter into force on the 30th day following such ex-
change, and that it shall remain in force until 6 months from the date
on which one Government informs the other of its desire to terminate
it.
It is hoped that the convention will be given favorable consideration
by the Senate.
Respectfully submitted.
W. AVERILL HARRIMAN.
(Enclosures: Consular convention with the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, with protocol, signed at Moscow June 1, 1964.)
CONSULAR CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOV-
ERNMENT OF THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST RE-
PUBLICS
The Government of the United States of America and the Govern-
ment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
Desiring to cooperate in strengthening friendly relations and to
regulate consular relations between both states,
Have decided to conclude a consular convention and for this purpose
have agreed on the following:
DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of the present Convention, the terms introduced
hereunder have the following meaning:
(1) "Consular establishment"-means any consulate general,
consulate, vice consulate or consular agency;
(2) "Consular district"-means the area assigned to a consular
establishment for the exercise of consular functions;
(3) "Head of consular establishment"-meanns a consul general,
consul, vice consul, or consular agent directing the consular establish-
ment;
. (4) "Consular officer"-means any person, including the head of
the consular establishment, entrusted with the exercise of consular
functions. Also included in the definition of "consular officer" are
persons assigned to the consular establishment for training in the con-
sular service.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
6 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
(5) "Employee of the consular establishment"-means any person
performing administrative, technical, or service functions in a. consular
establishment.
OPENING OF CONSULAR ESTABLISHMENTS, APPOINTMENT OF CONSULAR
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
1. A consular establishment may be opened in the territory of the
receiving state only with that state's consent.
2. The location of a consular establishment and the limits of its
consular district will be determined by agreement between the sending
and receiving states.
3. Prior to the appointment of a head of a consular establishment,
the sending state shall obtain the approval of the receiving state to
such an appointment through diplomatic channels,
4. The diplomatic mission of the sending state shall transmit to
the foreign affairs ministry of the receiving state a consular commission
which shall contain the full name of the head of the consular establish-
ment, his citizenship, his class, the consular district assigned to him,
and the seat of the consular establishment.
5. A head of a consular establishment may enter upon the exercise
of his duties only after .having been recognized in this capacity by
the receiving state. Such recognition after the presentation of the
commission shall be in the form of a exequatur or in another form and
shall be free of charge.
6. The full name, function and class of all consular officers other
than the head of a consular establishment, and the full name and func-
tion of employees of the consular establishment shall be notified in
advance by the sending state to the receiving state.
The receiving state shall issue to each consuar officer an appropriate
document confirming his right to carry out consular functions in the
territory of the receiving state.
7. The receiving state may at any time, and without having to
explain its decision, notify the sending state through diplomatic
channels that any consular officer is persona non grata or that any
employee of the consular establishment is unacceptable. In such a
case the sending state shall accordingly recall such officer or employee
of the consular establishment. If the sending state refuses or fails
within a reasonable time to carry out its obligations under the present
paragraph, the receiving state may refuse to recognize the officer or
employee concerned as a member of the consular establishment.
8. with the exception of members of the staff of the diplomatic
mission of the sending state, as defined in paragraph (c) of Article 1
of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, no national of the
sending state already present in the receiving state or in transit
thereto may be appointed as a consular officer or employee of the
consular establislmient.
Consular officers may be nationals only of the sending state.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 7
The receiving state shall take the necessary measures in order that
a consular officer may carry out his duties and enjoy the rights,
privileges, and immunities provided for in the present Convention
and by the laws of the receiving state
1. The receiving state shall either facilitate the acquisition on its
territory, in accordance with its laws and regulations, by the sending
state of premises necessary for its consular establishment or assist the
latter in obtaining accommodation in some other way.
2. It shall also, where necessary, assist the sending state in obtaining
suitable accommodation for the personnel of its consular establishment.
1. If the head of the consular establishment cannot carry out his
functions or if the position of head of a consular establishment is
vacant, the sending state may empower a consular officer of the same
or another consular establishment, or one of the members of the
diplomatic staff of its diplomatic mission in the receiving state, to
act temporarily as head of the consular establishment. The full
name of this person must be transmitted in advance to the foreign
affairs ministry of the receiving state.
2. A person empowered to act as temporary head of the consular
establishment shall enjoy the rights, privileges and immunities of the
head of the consular establishment.
3. When, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of the
present Art cle, a member of the diplomatic staff of the diplomatic
mission of the sending state in the receiving state is designated by
the sending state as an acting head of the consular establishment, he
shall continue to enjoy diplomatic privileges and immunities.
CONSULAR FUNCTIONS
A consular officer shall be entitled within his consular district to
perform the following functions, and for this purpose may apply orally
or in writing to the competent authorities of the consular district:
(1) To protect the rights and interests of the sending state and its
nationals, both individuals and bodies corporate;
(2) To further the development of commercial, economic, cultural
and scientific relations between the sending state and the receiving
state and otherwise promote the development of friendly relations
between them;
(3) To register nationals of the sending state, to issue or amend
passports and other certificates of identity, and also to issue entry,
exit, and transit visas;
(4) To draw up and record certificates of birth and death of citizens
of the sending state taking place in the receiving state, to record
marriages and divorces, if both persons entering into marriage or
divorce are citizens of the sending state, and also to receive such
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
8 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
declarations pertaining to famil relationships of a national of the
sending state as may be required under the law of the sending state,
unless prohibited by the laws of the receiving state;
(5) To draw up, certify, attest, authenticate, legalize and take
other actions which might be necessary to validate any act or docu-
ment of a legal character, as well as copies thereof, including
commercial documents, declarations, registrations, testamentary
dispositions, and contracts, upon the application of a national of the
sending state, when such document is intended for use outside the
territory of the receiving state, and also for any person, when such
document is intended for use in the territority of the sending state;
(6) To translate any acts and documents into the English and
Russian languages and to certify to the accuracy of the translations;
(7) To perform other official consular functions entrusted to him
by the sending state if they are not contrary to the laws of the
receiving state.
1. The acts and documents speced in pargaraph 5 of Article 7 of
the present Convention which are drawn up or certified by the consular
officer with his official seal affixed, as well as copies, extracts, and
translations of such acts and documents certified by him with his
official seal affixed, shall be receivable in evidence in the receiving state
as official or officially certified acts, documents, copies, translations,
or extracts, and shall have the same force and effect as though they
were drawn up or certified by the competent authorities or officials
of the receiving state; provided that such documents shall have been
drawn and executed in conformity with the laws and regulations of
the country where they are designed to take effect.
2. The acts, documents, copies, translations, or extracts, enumerated
in paragraph 1 of the present Article shall be authenticated if required
by the laws of the receiving state when they are presented to the
authorities of the receiving state.
If the relevant information is available to the competent authorities
of the receiving state, such authorities shall inform the consular
establishment of the death of a national of the sending state.
ARTICLE 10
1. In the case of the death of a national of the sending state in
the territory of the receiving state, without leaving in the territory
of his decease any known heir or testamentary executor, the appropri-
ate local authorities of the receiving state shall as prompt=ly as possible
inform a consular officer of the sending state.
2. A consular officer of the sending state may, within the discretion
of the appropriate judicial authorities and if permissible under then
existing applicable local law in the receiving state: left b
(a) take provisional custody of the personaproperty lf the
a deceased national of the sending state, provided
decedent shall have left in the receiving state no heir or testa-
mentary executor appointed by the decedent to take care of his
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 9
personal estate; provided that such provisional custody shall be
relinquished to a duly appointed administrator;
(b) administer the estate of a deceased national of the sending
state who is not a resident of the receiving state at the time of his
death, who leaves no testamentary executor, and who leaves in the
receiving state no heir, provided that if authorized to administer
the estate, the consular officer shall relinquish such administration
upon the appointment of another administrator;
(c) represent the interests of a national of the sending state in
an estate in the receiving state, provided that such national is
not a resident of the receiving state, unless or until such national
is otherwise represented: provided, however, that nothing herein
shall authorize a consular officer to act as an attorney at law.
3. Unless prohibited by law, a consular officer may, within the dis-
cretion of the court, agency, or person making distribution, receive for
transmission to a national of the sending state who is not a resident of
the receiving state any money or property to which such national is
entitled as a consequence of the death of another person, including
shares in an estate, payments made pursuant to workmen's compensa-
tion laws, pension and social benefits systems in general, and proceeds
of insurance policies.
The court, agency, or person making distribution may require that
a consular officer comply with conditions laid down with regard to:
(a) presenting a power of attorney or other authorization from such
nonresident national, (b) furnishing reasonable evidence of the receipt
of such money or property by such national, and (c) returning the
money or property in the event he is unable to furnish such evidence.
4. Whenever a consular officer shall perform the functions referred
to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, he shall be subject, with respect
to the exercise of such functions, to the laws of the receiving state and
to the civil jurisdiction of the judicial and administrative authorities
of the receiving state in the same manner and to the same extent as a
national of the receiving state.
A consular officer may recommend to the courts or to other compe-
tent authorities of the receiving state appropriate persons to act in the
capacity of guardians or trustees for citizens of the sending state -or
for the property of such citizens when this property is left without
supervision.
In the event that the court or competent authorities consider that
the recommended candidate is for some reason unacceptable, the con-
sular officer may propose a new candidate.
1. A consular officer shall have the right within his district to meet
with, communicate with, assist, and advise any national of the sending
state and, where necessary, arrange for legal assistance for him. The
receiving state shall in no way restrict the access of nationals of the
sending state to its consular establishments.
2. The appropriate authorities of the receiving state shall immedi-
ately inform a consular officer of the sending state about the arrest or
detention in other form of a national of t}},,e en ~n ta,tte~,
Approved For Release 2005/08/16: CIA- F~D~n~ t 013$,000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
10 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
3. A consular officer of the sending state shall have the right without
delay to visit and communicate with a national of the sending state
who is under arrest or otherwise detained in custody or is serving a
sentence of imprisonment. The rights referred to in this paragraph
shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the
receiving state, subject to the proviso, however, that the said laws
and regulations must not nullify these rights.
1. A consular officer may provide aid and assistance to vessels sailing
under. the flag of the sending state which have entered a port in his
consular district.
2. Without prejudice to the powers of the receiving state, a consular
officer may conduct investigations into any incidents which occurred
during the voyage on vessels sailing under the flag of the sending state,
and may settle disputes of any kind between the master, the officers
and the seamen insofar as this may be authorized by the laws of the
sending state. A consular officer may request the assistance of the
competent authorities of the receiving state in the performance of
such duties.
3. In the event that the courts or other competent authorities of the
receiving state intend to take any coercive action on vessels sailing
under the flag of the sending state while they are located in the waters
of the receiving state, the competent authorities of the receiving state
shall, unless .it is impractical to do so in view of the urgency of the
matter, inform a consular officer of the sending state prior to initiating
such action so that the consular officer may be present when the action
is taken. Whenever it is impractical to notify a consular officer in
advance, the competent authorities of the receiving state shall inform
him as soon as possible thereafter of the action taken.
4. Paragraph 3 of this Article shall not apply to customs, passport,
and sanitary inspections, or to action taken at the request or with the
approval of the master of the vessel.
5. The term "vessel", as used in the present Convention, does not
include warships.
If a vessel sailing under the flag of the sending state suffers ship-
wreck, runs aground, is swept ashore, or suffers any other accident
whatever within the territorial limits of the receiving state, the
competent authorities of the receiving state shall immediately inform
a. consular officer and advise him of the measures which they have
taken to rescue persons, vessel, and cargo.
The consular officer may provide all kinds of assistance to such a
vessel, the members of its crew, and its passengers, as well as take
measures in connection with the preservation of the cargo and repair
of the ship, or he may request the authorities of the receiving state to
take such measures.
The competent authorities of the receiving state shall render the
necessary assistance to the consular officer in measures taken by him
in connection with the accident to the vessel.
No customs duties shall be levied against a wrecked vessel, its
cargo or stores, in the territory of the receiving state, unless they are
delivered for use in that state.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 11
If the owner or anyone authorized to act for him is unable to make
necessary arrangements in connection with the vessel or its cargo,
the consular officer may make such arrangements. The consular
officer may under similar circumstances make arrangements in con-
nection with cargo owned by the sending state or any of its nationals
and found or brought into port from a wrecked vessel sailing under
the flag of any state except a vessel of the receiving state.
ARTICLE 15
Articles 13 and 14, respectively, shall also apply to aircraft.
RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES
The national flag of the sending state and the consular flag may be
flown at the consular establishment, at the residence of the head of the
consular establishment, and on its means of transport used by him in
the performance of his official duties. The shield with the national
coat-of-arms of the sending state and the name of the establishment
may also be affixed on the building in which the consular establishment
is located.
The consular archives shall be inviolable at all times and wherever
they may be. Unofficial papers shall not be kept in the consular
archives.
The buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary thereto,
used for the purposes of the consular establishment and the residence
of the head of the consular establishment, shall be inviolable.
The police and other authorities of the receiving state may not
enter the building or that part of the building which is used for the
purposes of the consular establishment or the residence of the head of
the consular establishment without the consent of the head thereof,
persons appointed by-him, or the head of the diplomatic mission of the
sending state.
1. The consular establishment shall have the right to communicate
with its Government, with the diplomatic mission and the consular
establishments of the sending state in the receiving state, or with other
diplomatic missions and consular establishments of the sending state,
making use of all ordinary means of communication. In such com-
munications, the consular establishment shall have the right to use
code, diplomatic couriers, and the diplomatic pouch. The same fees
shall apply to consular establishments in the use of ordinary means of
communication as apply to the diplomatic mission of the sending
state.
2. The official correspondence of a consular establishment, regard-
less of what means of communication are used, and the sealed diplo-
matic pouch bearing visible external marks of its official character,
shall be inviolable and not subject to examination or detention by the
authorities of the receiving state.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
12 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
1. Consular officers shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of the
receiving state in matters relating to their official activity. The same
applies to employees of the consular establishment, if they are na-
tionals of the sending state.
2. Consular officers and employees of the consular establishment
who are nationals of the sending state shall enjoy immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state.
3. This immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving
state of consular officers and employees of the consular establishment
of the sending state may be waived by the sending state. Waiver
must always be express.
1. Consular officers and employees of the consular establishment,
on the invitation of a court of the receiving state, shall appear in court
for witness testimony. Taking measures to compel a consular officer
or an employee of the consular establishment who is a national of the
sending state to appear in court as a witness and to give witness
testimony is not permissible.
2. If a consular officer or an employee of the consular establishment
who is a national of the sending state for official reasons or for reasons
considered valid according to the laws of the receiving state cannot
appear in court, lie shall inform the court thereof and give witness testi-
mon y on the premises of the consular establishment or in his own
abode.
3. Whenever under the laws of the receiving state an oath is required
to be taken in court by consular officers and employees of the consular
establishment, an affirmation shall be accepted in lieu thereof.
4. Consular officers and employees of the consular establishment
may refuse to give witness testimony on facts relating to their official
activity.
5. The provisions of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 shall also apply to
proceedings conducted by administrative authorities.
1. Immovable property, situated in the territory of the receiving
state, of which the sending state or one or more persons acting in its
behalf is the owner or lessee and which is used for diplomatic or con-
sular purposes, including residences for personnel attached to the
diplomatic and consular establishments, shall be exempt from taxation
of any kind imposed by the receiving state or any of its states or local
governments other than such as represent payments for specific
services rendered.
2. The exemption from taxation referred to in paragraph 1 of this
Article shall not apply to such charges, duties, and taxes if, under the
law of the receiving state, they are payable by the person who con-
tracted with the sending state or with the person acting on its behalf.
A consular officer or employee of a consular establishment, who is
not a national of the receiving state and who does not have the status
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
13
in the receiving state of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence, shall be exempt from the payment of all taxes or similar
charges of any kind imposed by the receiving state or any of its states
or local governments on official emoluments, salaries, wages, or allow-
ances received by such officer or employee from the sending state in
connection with the discharge of his official functions.
1. A 'consular officer or employee of a consular establishment who
is not a national of the receiving state and who does not have the
status in the receiving state of an alien lawfully admitted for per-
manent residence, shall, except as provided in paragraph 2 of this
Article, be exempt from the payment of all taxes or similar charges of
any kind imposed by the receiving state or any of its states or local
governments, for the payment of which the officer or employee of the
consular establishment would otherwise be legally liable.
2. The exemption from taxes or charges provided in paragraph 1 of
this Article does not apply in respect to taxes or charges upon :
(a) The acquisition or possession of private immovable prop-
erty located in the receiving state if the persons referred to in
paragraph 1 of this Article do not own or lease this property on
the behalf of the sending state for the purposes of the consular
establishment;
(b) Income received from sources in the receiving state other
than as described in Article 22 of the present Convention;
(c) The transfer by gift of property in the receiving state;
(d) The transfer at death, including by inheritance, of property
in the receiving state.
3. However, the exemption from taxes or similar charges provided
in paragraph 1 of this Article, applies in respect to movable inherited
property left after the death of a consular officer or employee of the
consular establishment or a member of his family residing with him if
they are not nationals of the receiving state or aliens lawfully admitted
for permanent residence, and if the property was located in the
receiving state exclusively in connection with the sojourn in this state
of the deceased as a consular officer or employee of the consular estab-
lishment or member of his family residing with him.
A consular officer or employee of a consular establishment and
members of his family residing with him who are not nationals of the
receiving state and who do not have the status in the receiving state
of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, shall be exempt
in the receiving state from service in the armed forces and from all
other types of compulsory service.
A consular officer or employee of a consular establishment and mem-
bers of his family residing with him who do not have the status in
the receiving state of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence,
shall be exempt from all obligations under the laws and regulations of
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
14 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
the receiving state with regard to the registration of aliens, and obtain-
ing permission to reside, and from compliance with other similar
requirements applicable to aliens,
1. The same full exemption from customs duties and internal
revenue or other taxes imposed upon or by reason of importation shall
apply in the receiviii state to all articles, including motor vehicles,
imported exclusively for the official use of a consular establishment, as
applies to articles imported for the official use of the diplomatic
mission of the sending state.
2. Consular officers, and employees of the consular establishment,
and members of their families residing with them, who are not nationals
of the receiving state, and who do not have the status in the receiving
state of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, shall be
granted, on the basis of reciprocity, the same exemptions from customs
duties and internal revenue or other taxes imposed upon or by reason
of importation, as are granted to corresponding personnel of the
diplomatic mission of the sending state.
3. For the purpose of paragraph 2 of this Article the term "cor-
responding personnel of the diplomatic mission" refers to members
of the diplomatic staff in the case of consular officers, and to members
of the administrative and technical staff in the case of employees of
a consular establishment.
ARTICLE 27
Subject to the laws and regulations of the receiving state concernin
zones entry into which is prohibited or regulated for reasons of national
security, a consular officer shall be permitted to travel freely within
the limits of his consular district to carry out his official duties,
Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty
of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the
laws and regulations of the receiving state, including traffic regulations.
ARTICLE 29
1. The rights and obligations of consular officers provided for in
the present Convention also apply to members of the diplomatic staff
of the diplomatic mission of the Contracting Parties charged with the
performance of consular functions in the diplomatic mission and who
have been notified in It consular capacity to the foreign affairs ministry
of the receiving state by the diplomatic mission,
2. Except as provided in paragraph 4 of Article 10 of the present
Convention, the performance of consular functions by the persons re-
ferred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall not affect the diplomatic
privileges and immunities granted to them as members of the diplo-
matic mission.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
FINAL PROVISIONS
. ARTICLE 80
15
1. The present Convention shall be subject to ratification and shall
enter into force on the thirtieth day following the exchange of instru-
ments of ratification, which shall take place in. Washington as soon
as possible.
2. The Convention shall remain in force until six months from the
date on which one of the Contracting Parties informs the other Con-
tracting Party of its desire to terminate its validity.
In witness whereof the Plenipotentiaries of the two Contracting
Parties have signed the present Convention and affixed their seals
thereto.
Done in Moscow on June 1, 1964 in two copies, each in the English
and the Russian language, both texts being equally authentic.
For the Government of the United States of America:
Foy D. KOHLER
Ambassador of the United States of America to the U.S.S.R.
For the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics:
A. GROMYKO
Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics
PROTOCOL TO THE CONSULAR CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERN-
MENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT
OF THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
1. It is agreed between the Contracting Parties that the notifica-
tion of a consular officer of the arrest or detention in other form of a
national of the sending state specified in paragraph 2 of Article 12 of
the Consular Convention between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics of June 1, 1964, shall take place within one to three days
from the time of arrest or detention depending on conditions of
communication.
2. It is agreed between the Contracting Parties that the rights
specified in paragraph 3 of Article 12 of the Consular Convention of a
consular officer to visit and communicate with a national of the sending
state who is under arrest or otherwise detained in custody shall be
accorded within two to four days of the arrest or detention of such
national depending upon his location.
3. It is agreed between the Contracting Parties that the rights
specified in paragraph 3 of Article 12 of the Consular Convention of a
consular officer to visit and communicate with a national of the
sending state who is under arrest or otherwise detained in custody or
is serving a sentence of imprisonment shall be accorded on a con-
tinuing basis.
The present Protocol constitutes an integral part of the Consular
Convention between the Government of the United States of America
and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of
June 1, 1964,
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
16 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Done at Moscow on June 1, 1964 in two copies, each in the English
and the Russian language, both texts being equally authentic.
For the Government of the United States of America:
Foy D. KOULER
Ambassador of the United States of America to the U.S.S.R.
For the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics:
A. GROUyxo
Minister or Foreign, Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 17
The CHAIRMAN. We had decided to proceed with hearings if the
committee so voted. That is what I. meant to say.
Mr. Secretary, will you proceed?
STATEMENT OF HON. DEAN RUSK, SECRETARY OF STATE; ACCOM-
PANIED BY LEONARD C. MEEKER, THE LEGAL ADVISER, DE-
PARTMENT OF STATE; RICHARD H. DAVIS, ACTING ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, BUREAU OF EUROPEAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF
STATE; AND DOUGLAS MacARTHUR II, ASSISTANT' SECRETARY
OF STATE FOR CONGRESSIONAL RELATIONS
Secretary RUSK. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I
am very pleased to have with me this morning my colleague, Assistant
Secretary of State Douglas MacArthur, the distinguished Legal Ad-
viser to the Department of State, Mr. Leonard Meeker, and Mr. Rich-
ard Davis, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for European Affairs.
FIRST BILATERAL TREATY WITH THE U.S.S.R.
I shall speak relatively briefly, Mr. Chairman, on this matter that
is before us. If the Senate approves this treaty :For ratification, it will
be the first treaty which we would have of a bilateral character between
the United States and the Soviet Union.
Its subject matter is not dramatic, but nevertheless it is very impor-
tant. I suppose that the earliest responsibility of the Department of
State from the very beginning has been the protection of American citi-
zens abroad. We have had some special problems in that regard in
our relations over the years with the Soviet Union. We have had two
different systems of law, an open society in relation with what is basi-
cally a closed society, with special problems and sensitivities and ani-
mosities particularly during the Stalinist period. And so we have had
a number. of continuing problems about giving adequate protection to
our citizens who might be traveling in the Soviet Union.
At the present time there is an increase in the number of our citi-
zens who are going there. We hope that the general situation will per-
mit some increase in trade between ourselves and the Soviet Union,
giving further emphasis to the importance of the normal type of con-
sular relations that exist between us and many other governments.
This consular convention will help to normalize further our rela-
tions with the Soviet Union. It will help to reduce sources of friction
between us.
Some of these incidents which have occurred with respect to the
treatment of American citizens have been extremely sensitive. They
have taken on very large political implications. They have at times
required the intervention of the President of the United States with
the Chief 'of Government of the Soviet Union.
If we can find ways to deal with such problems properly, through
normal consular channels, then we feel that there would be a gain in
the relations between our two great countries.
We feel also that this convention would encourage the Soviet Union
to accept the conduct which other responsible nations accept in their
treatment of foreigners and of foreign interests within their territory.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
18 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
It will place obligations u on the Soviet authorities to respect some
of the elementary civil rights which are cherished by democratic
nations.
Let me turn briefly to the important specific provisions of the con-
vention and to the benefits which it will provide for American citizens.
Apart from distinctive provisions on notification, consular access, and
consular immunity, which differ from the pattern of our previous
consular conventions, the convention follows the standard pattern of
such conventions.
Like others it is a bilateral treaty designed to regulate the activities
and functions of consular establishments and their officers and
employees.
The provisions governing these activities and functions are com-
parable to those in our conventions with other countries. In my view
this convention, which was carefully negotiated over an 8-month pe-
riod following informal discussions between our two Governments
beginning with my predecessor, Secretary Christian Herter, is ad-
vantageous to our national interests.
The convention, if ratified, will, of course, be a document of high
value to both countries. It will provide much-needed regularization
of traditional contacts between the two countries affecting the flow of
people and of ships and, perhaps of growing importance, commerce.
Conversely, it will supply a reference point to reduce unnecessary
misunderstanding. It is well known that the Soviet and American
ways of doing things are often quite unlike. A common set of ground
rules is desirable if they can be achieved. Since many more Americans
visit the U.S.S.R. than Soviet citizens visit the United States, the con-
vention has special importance for the United States.
CONSULAR PROVISIONS TO PROTECT AMERICAN VISITORS
About 12,000 American tourists visited the U.S.S.R. last year, while
only 204 Soviet tourists came to the United States. Those figures on
Soviet visitors to the United States do not include about 650 who came
over on exchange programs of various sorts under official sponsorship.
Because we value so highly the protection of individual rights, the
Convention's provisions on notification and access have particular
significance, These clauses should improve markedly the ability of
the Department of State to protect and assist the thousands of Ameri-
cans who now visit the U.S.S.R. as tourists or on business or under the
exchange program.
The current practice in the Soviet. Union is to refuse access to ar-
rested persons until after the completion of investigation, which under
Soviet, law can extend for 9 months. You probably recall the disap-
pearance of Prof. Frederick Baghoorn in the U.S.S.R. in 1963. Only
after 12 days did our Embassy in Moscow learn of his arrest.. The
Soviet authorities never allowed our officials to visit him in prison. If
this Convention had been in effect in 1963, the Soviet. authorities would
have been obliged to notify us of his arrest within 3 days and to grant
us consular access within 4 days.
The U.S.S.R. has never before given so specific a guarantee on ac-
cess. Other governments have recognized the importance of the noti-
fication and access provisions in the United States-U.S.S.R. Conven-
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 19
tion, and have indicated an interest in obtaining these benefits for
themselves. We understand, for example, that the Japanese are cur-
rently preparing to negotiate a consular convention with the Soviets
and hope to achieve the same access and notification provisions.
The British, we understand, are in the final stages of negotiating a
consular convention with the U.S.S.R. which incorporates these
safeguards.
IMMUNITIES FOR CONSULAR PERSONNEL
As an additional measure of protection which we regard as impor-
tant, the Convention contains a special provision on immunity for
consular personnel. Under this provision they will be immune from
criminal prosecution. Related provisions of the Convention will pro-
tect against abuse of such immunity by Soviet consular officers.
These provisions specify first of all the right of the receiving state
to declare consular personnel persona non grata. Thus by means of
a persona non rata action we would be able to remove from this
country any individual who abused his official privilege. The Con-
vention also states that all persons enjoying immunity from criminal
jurisdiction are obliged to respect the laws and regulations of the re-
ceiving state, including traffic regulations. Finally, the Convention
provides for screening all nominees for consular assignments in ad-
vance, so that we would not have to accept as a consul any Soviet citizen
to whom we objected.
The United States-U.S.S.R. Consular Convention, I wish to stress,
does not itself authorize the opening of any consulates in either country.
It merely provides a legal framework for their operation when open.
If the present Convention is ratified, the Department of State plans to
discuss with Soviet representatives the possibility of opening at least
one American consulate in the Soviet Union.
Leningrad, the second largest city in the Soviet Union, and a favorite
place for visiting Americans, is the most attractive of several possible
sites for such a consulate.
The U.S.S.R. has not indicated where it might like to open a consu-
late in this country. In any discussion of the establishment of con-
sulates we would be sure we receive at least as advantageous a location
as we give.
I should like to add, Mr. Chairman, that we would expect to be in
consultation with this committee with respect to any discussions which
we have about opening one of our consulates there or one of their
consulates here.
EFFECT OF CONVENTION ON ESPIONAGE AND SUBVERSION
My remarks would not be complete if I did not invite the committee's
attention to the question of whether this Convention and any con-
sulates established subsequently would result in opening the door to
Communist espionage and subversion.
This possibility was, of course, carefully considered in consultation
with other responsible agencies of our Government before we signed
the Consular Convention. We are satisfied that. the Convention would
not materially affect this problem. If after ratification of the Con-
vention we agree to an opening of a Soviet consulate in an American
city, its employees will be subject to the same visa screel~
Approved For Release 2005/08/16: CIA-RDP7OB003~ U }}''r~.(~40028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
20 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
controls as officers and employees of the Soviet Embassy in Washington,
of whom some are now carrying on consular functions. They Will
also be subject to the same travel restrictions as now apply to Soviet
officials asst ed to Soviet missions in the United Skates. They
would be subject to the expulsion provision of the Consular Con-
vention.
Finally, a relatively small number of consular officials would make
little difference in the total of Soviet citizens in the United States
possessing immunity from criminal jurisdiction. As of July 1, 1965,
there were 847 Soviet citizens residing in the United States of whom
240 officials and 150 dependents had diplomatic immunity.
These, I believe., are the most significant aspects of the Convention
itself.
I would close, Mr. Chairman, with a remark on the place which
this Convention occupies in the total atmosphere which exists at the
present time between ourselves and the Soviet Union. There is no
question that our relations at the present. time are under strain. There
is no question that the dangerous situation in southeast Asia has inter-
fered significantly with the search for further points of agreement
which many of us had hoped we could find following this signature of
a nuclear test ban treaty.
I have had the privilege of appearing with this committee in execu-
tive session on more than one occasion to discuss this aspect of the
matter and our relations with the Soviet Union. So, I do not suggest
that the atmosphere today is good. But I would suggest that in the
face of that atmosphere, and perhaps even a litle bit because of it, we
ought to pay attention to those points, whether they are minor and
administrative in character, or broader such as in the disarmament
field, we ought. to pay attention to those points at which we think some
progress can ?be made in getting our relations on a more normal basis.
A Consular Convention is a rather long-term affair. It attempts
to put, on an administrative and routine base, if possible, problems
which otherwise stimulate tension and make more difficult the relations
between our two countries.
So we would hope that the committee would give full consideration
to the suggestion that even though we would like to see more sub-
stantial improvement. in the relations between our two countries on
broad political issues, and very especially on the dangerous issue of
southeast Asia, nevertheless it is not too early to try to resolve some
of these problems we have between us where we can, when we can.
The consular convention makes it possible, therefore, for us to move
forward quietly rather modestly in an attempt. to eliminate some of
the causes of friction which may exist between us and which may
develop in the future as we attempt to give full protection to our citi-
zens traveling in the Soviet Union.
I think that is all I need say at, this time, Mr. Chairman, in order
to move onto the committee's questions and comments.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Just to summarize a bit, this articular convention in and of itself
does not. establish any consulates
Secretary Rusg. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN, It provides certain rights and obligations and so
on in case they are established?
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION. WITH THE SOVIET UNION 21
Secretary RusK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect, if it were ratified, upon
the obligations of the present diplomatic representatives in the respec-
tive countries I
In other words, even though no further consulates were opened,
would the rights for notification within certain terms provided in here
apply to our Embassy in Moscow I
TERMS OF CONVENTION TO APPLY IMMEDIATELY
Secretary RUSK. Well, the rights, for example, of notification and
access would apply for all American citizens. Therefore, those pro-
visions would become operative for all of Our citizens, including official
personnel.
The CHAIRMAN. They would become operative insofar as their re-
lations with our Embassy in Moscow is concerned even though no
additional consulates were opened; is that not correct I
Secretary RUSK. That is correct.
The CHAIRMAN. So it has that immediate effect even though addi-
tional consulates are not opened?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir. And there are important
benefits----
The CHAIRMAN. This would be important, if I understand you
correctly, in that we had, as you indicated, some 12,000 visitors to
the Soviet Union last year?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. So it does have an immediate effect, although the
actual opening of additional consulates will await further agreement
as to where they may be opened.
Secretary RUSK. Mr. Chairman, I feel that the provisions of the
consular convention which have to do with the protection of people
really are more important than the question of opening an additional
consulate or two in each country.
CONSULATES CLOSED IN 1948
These are the problems which need resolution. The Soviet Union
had three consulates in this country outside of Washington up until
1948. There was an incident in 1948 in the consulate in New York,
*hich led to the expulsion of the Consul General because of his han-
dling of this situation and at that point the Soviet Union withdrew its
three consulates and asked us to withdraw our consulate which we then
had at Vladivostok.
Senator SYMINOTON. I didn't follow.
Would you repeat that?
Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir. During the war and up until 1$48, the
Soviet Union had three consulates in this country. There was an in-
cident in New York. One of the employees of the consulate jumped
out of the window, you will remember, and the conduct of the consul
oneral in that case was such that we felt it necessary to expel him.
On that occasion the Soviet Union then closed up its three consulates
in this country and asked us to close the consulate that we had in
Vladivostok. So we have had Soviet consulates before in this country.
The CHAIRMAN. You had them before?
Appro dd1 se 2005/08/16: CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
22 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Secretary RUSK. 'es sir.
The CiiAmmAN. And as you stated correctly, it is possible for you
to open consulates now, but without the protection provided in this
convention; is that not correct?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN, Neither country has pressed the matter of opening
consulates under present conditions; is that correct?
Secretary RUSH. That is correct.
The CHAIRMAN. So that while some people think that this does not
have any effect until you open a consulate, it does in effect have a very
important effect even though no more consulates are opened?
Secretary RUSK. It does indeed, particularly in the matter of pro-
tection of American citizens.
The CHAIR MAN. On this ground of protection of American pperson-
nel, I assume than as in most, cases these rights are reciprocal? We
would have to give notification in a similar manner in the case of the
arrest of one of their citizens? It works both ways, doesn't it?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, although our practice has been
to give such notification in any event.
The CHAIRMAN. I understand. But we are talking about the pro-
posed provisions,
Secretary RUSK, That is correct.
The CIIAmMAN. Regardless of what the practices are, all these
rights are reciprocal, whatever they may be.
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Would you specify a little more concisely the dif-
ference between this convention and other conventional and ordinary
conventions of this kind?
Secretary RUSK. May I, Mr. Chairman, call upon our distinguished
legal adviser to comment on that point because he has examined it
in some detail.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. Meeker?
Mr. MEEKER. Mr, Chairman, the principal differences between this
convention and other consular conventions which we concluded in the
recent past. are the following:
First of all, there is the provision on immunity from criminal juris-
diction. This is not present in other consular conventions to the same
extent. There is in other consular conventions provisions concerning
immunity front criminal prosecution of consular officers with respect
to misdemeanors, but that immunity extends only with respect to mis-
demeanors.
Under the convention with the U.S.S.R., the immunity from criminal
jurisdiction is complete.
Another difference is that the convention
The CHAIRMAN. May I ask, you say complete. For this the remedy
is expulsion, isn't it?
Mr. MEEKER. That is correct, It is simply that there may not be
any criminal prosecution of a consular officer or employee for an
offense.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 23
The CHAIRMAN. That is right.
Mr. MEEKER. The other principal difference relates to the obli&a-
tion of notification. We have in this convention with the Soviet
Union obligations on notification of arrest of citizens and acccess to
citizens, which are much more specific than what we have in any
other consular convention.
These rights are set forth both in article 12 and in a protocol to the
convention. The protocol has three main paragraphs which we re-
gard as being very important. In the first place, there is a right and
a duty of notification of arrest within 1 to 3 days of the time of arrest.
There is an obligation to give access to a consular officer in 2 to 4
days again from the time of arrest.
Finally, the protocol makes very clear that the right of access con-
tinues throughout any period of detetention of a citizen of the other
country, including a period of imprisonment to which a national of
the other country might be sentenced.
Those are the main differences between this convention and the
others that we have entered into.
The CHAIRMAN. What effect will this convention have on our other
consular relations; that is with our consular relations in other
countries?
Secretary RUSK. The usual consular convention includes a most-
favored-nation clause, and others would have the right to raise with us
establishing various privileges, but only on a basis of reciprocity.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
Secretary RUSK. It would be my prediction that since the general
practice is different among countries which have the same kind of legal
order and the same kind of general practice as we do, we would not
expect that all of them would wish to move in this direction, because
existing arrangements are, in general, satisfactory. But they would
have the right to raise it.
If they were willing to extend to us the same privileges we would
be asked to give them the same privileges.
The CHAIRMAN. What provisions in this convention provide for
termination in case it has proved to be unsatisfactory for some reason?
A notification of 6 months, isn't it?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. For termination?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes, sir. Article 30 states that the convention shall
remain in force until 6 months from the date on which one of the
contracting parties informs the other of its desire to terminate its
The CHAIRMAN. Does the convention have any hearing on the right
of asylum, political asylum? Mr. MEEKER. No, Mr. Chairman; it has no bearing at all on that.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Clark, do you wish to ask some questions at
this point?
Senator CLARK. Yes; I would like to.
The CHAIRMAN. I will come back later. I don't wish to monopolize
the time.
Senator CLARK. How about Senator Hickenlooper?
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I have some questions but I will defer to
Senator Clark.
The ~CQHAIRMAN. We usually alternate from one side to the other,
App lchr"Ft~Ahase 2005/08/16: CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
24 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
DEFINITION OF OFFICIAL ACTIVITY
Senator IIICEENLOOrER. Mr. Secretary, article 19 states that consular
officers and employees who are nationals of the sending state shall
not be subject to the jurisdiction of the receiving state "iii matters re-
lating to their official activity."
Is it the sending state or the receiving state that will decide whether
or not a matter relates to official activity?
Secretary RUSH. In the case of, say, a Soviet consular officer in this
country it would be for the American courts to decide whether matters
to which you are now referring fell within his official acts or were
personal in character. Our own courts would make that determina-
tion. We are now talking about civil jurisdiction, not criminal juris-
diction.
Senator HICHENLOOPER. How does that conflict with the act of state
doctrine?
Secretary RUSE. Well, there are acts which are acts of state and
thae are acts which are acts of people, and this is the distinction which
is being drawn here.
Senator HICKENLOOPEa. I know we have the opinion of the State
Department. and the assurance that our own courts would determine
whether the activity of the consular official or those under this im-
munity provision are in their official activity or not.
Secretary RrsE. That is correct, sir.
Senator HICHENI oorER. With how many nations in the world do
we have consular conventions or treaties, do you recall?
Secretary RUBE. There are about 35, Senator Hickenloopier, either
covered by consular conventions as such or bT other treaties which
include provisions similar to consular conventions. I have that list
here; I can insert it in the record if you wish.
Senator HICHENLOOI n. In how many of those conventions or
treaties do we have the most-favored-nation clause?
Secretary RrsE. I am informed that more than half of them have the
most-favored clause.
Senator IIICHENLOOrER. That would be around 15 or 18.
Secretary RUBE. We can insert the exact figure in the record, 27.
Senator IlICHENLOOrER. It was my understanding the other day that
it was some 30.
Secretary RrsK. I think the larger number had to do with specific
consular conventions and specific consular arran ments.
Senator HICEENLOOrEA. Now as to the most-favored-nation clause
in these treaties, we have agreed and are bound by the treaty to extend
the same privileges to these other countries with whom we have con-
sular conventions or agreements of this kind. So that upon their ap-
plication we would be bound to extend the same criminal immunity
against. criminal prosecution to the nationals, consular officials, and
others included in this list of immunity to all those other nations, is
that correct?
Secretary RUSE. Provided that they were willing to do the same
for ourselves on the basis of reciprocity.
Senator IIICEENLOOPER. Oh, yes. It would have to be reciprocal.
Secretary RUSE. There has been, Senator, as you know, a growing
tendency in diplomatic services to merge the diplomatic and the con-
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 25
sular functions. The historical and traditional sharp separation of
these functions is not as pronounced today as it might have been, say,
50 years ago. So, I think this is not as important a point as it might
have been when many governments were using local nationals as their
consuls and all sorts of other complications came in.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Do you have an estimate as to about how
many additional people full immunity against criminal prosecution
could be extended to under reciprocity as a result of the most-favored-
nation clause if this treaty goes into effect?
Secretary RUSK. If all of them exercise that option our estimate
is that approximately 400 officers and employees could be involved.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. So that if this treaty goes into effect with
the criminal prosecution immunity provision in it for consular officers
and certain others in the consulate, we would be extending the field
of immunity-at least if they all applied for it on a reciprocal basis-
we would be extending that criminal immunity in this country of
foreign nationals to over 400?
Secretary. RUSK. We would,'sir.
This convention, as you will recall I indicated, carries with it an
obligation on the part of these people to respect local law, including
traffic regulations. But the great expansion of personnel subject to
diplomatic immunity or special arrangements of that sort has come
about through the multiplication of states and the presence in this
country of the United Nations.
That has been a very great source of expansion of persons living
within this country with diplomatic immunity.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Yes; I merely wanted to know the number.
Secretary RUSK. Yes.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. We have never recognized the seizure of
Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia by the Soviets, and the forcible incor-
poration of those three nations into the Soviet Union, and yet we may
have and probably do have Americans who visit those, three areas be-
cause they have relatives or families or historic ties. What would we
do about Americans that might get into trouble in Latvia, Lithuania,
and Estonia?
Secretary RUSK. First of all, sir, this convention does not affect in
any way the question of recognition of the absorption of those coun-
tries into the Soviet Union. Recognition there is similar to the general
practice of recognition of states or of governments; that is, everything
turns upon the intent of the government concerned-in this case our-
selves. It would require us to make some formal statement of an intent
to recognize or an act of recognition before that could come about.
So, this convention itself does not affect that.
Nor would it be affected by the establishment of consular districts
there for the protection of our own citizens. We do have a bit of a
dilemma there, Senator. If American citizens go into areas whose
political status we do not recognize, we still have the responsibility of
doing what we can to give those citizens adequate protection, and, as
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
26 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
you know, we have had some difficulties in the courts and otherwise
about the limitations on the power of the U.S. Government to inhibit
the travel of its citizens into areas where we cannot afford adequate
protection.
So, our judgment, and our position are quite clear. This does not
affect the question of the recognition of the ,absorption of those three
states.
Senator Hlcxzi oorza. How would we deal with an American citi-
zen who goes into one of those three states that we do not recognize as
being under the sovereignty of or part of the Soviet Union.
What: if one of our citizens gets into some difficulty?
Secretary RUSK. Well, Senator, I think that we-
Senator HrOKENL OPER, How would we handle that? Under this
treaty would we be sending a consular officer into that area ? That
would be included in the so-called consular area if we established a
consulate, What do we do now? Do we come out of Moscow?
Secretary RUSK. Senator, I think I know what I would do if I were
a consular officer and one of our citizens got into trouble, but I think
I had better let my lawyer make a comment on this. Mr. Meeker?
Mr. MEEKER. Senator, I think the issue here is what can the U.S.
Government do in that kind of use to protect the interests, safety, and
the welfare of an American citizen who may find himself in difficulty
with the Soviet authorities.
I think our response would be to do everything that we could for
his protection as a practical matter and we would do it with the assist-
ance and the participation of consular officers whether from a consu-
late, if there were one outside of Moscow, or by consular officers from
the Embassy in Moscow.
Senator HICKENL00PER, Let me ask you this, to clarify your answer.
Suppose an American citizen got into some difficulty and they put him
in jail in Lithuania, Latvia, or Estonia, and our consular ofl cial went
down there or tried to go down there to see him, would he go down
waving this treaty and say, "I have a right to see this man," or would
he go down there as an American official out of Russia saying, "I want
to go into a land we don't recognize as being under the sovereignty
of Russia tp see this person."
Where would the right flow from?
Mr. MEEKER. Well, I think the right would be under the treaty and
it would be a right vis-a-vis the Soviet Government because its officers
were actually in control of the situation in the area, and our takingg
that view would be simply a means of enforcing rights which we thini~
we have vis-a-vis the Soviet. Government wherever their officials are
in charge. That action on our part would imply no change at all in
our stand about the seizure of the three Baltic States.
Senator HlcxlixLOorEn, You mean to say we would go in there under
a claimed authority based upon the fact upon our view that it is a de
facto control of those states rather than a de jure control of those
states?
Aren't we getting close to the question of whether or not, we recog-
nize the seizure of those three states by Russia?
Mr. MEEKER. We would not make any statement and indeed take no
position on the question of recognition de jure or de facto.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 27
What we would see would be that authorities of the Soviet Govern-
ment in fact were in charge at the place where the American citizen
was being detained, and because of that we would. apply to the Soviet
authorities for the enjoyment of U.S. rights under this treaty. We
would do that without making any statement or taking any position
to the effect that the three Baltic States were a part of the Soviet
Union.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. We might take that position but could we
sustain the right to do that?
Mr. MEEKER. I do not think that our rights under the treaty, our
rights vis-a-vis the Soviet Government, relate to any question of recog-
nition or nonrecognition of the seizure by the U.S.S.R. of particular
areas of territory. There are also areas formerly belonging to Poland,
to Czechoslovakia, to Rumania, which are now administered by the
U.S.S.R. and on which the United States has taken no formal position
at any time. I think that we would simply regard our rights under
the treaty as being rights vis-a-vis the Soviet Government and with-
out relation to any question of recognition of the absorption of terri-
tor .
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Let me ask you and I hope this can be
given, as a formal statement and opinion that we may rely upon in
connection with the consideration of this treaty.
Is there anything in this convention or this treaty or the protocol
surrounding it which will become incorporated in this as a treaty that
in any way alters or changes the responsibilities or the rights of the
central government of the United States by way of giving the central
government of the United States rights which it did not otherwise
possess under the Constitution?
In other words, we get down to the point of a treaty changing the
basic reserve or granting powers of the Federal Constitution so far as
the States and local communities, and the whole constitutional system,
are concerned.
Is there anything here that changes the rights or the privileges that
do not already exist in the central government?
Mr. MEEKER. Senator, there are provisions in the treaty dealing
with tax exemption, for example, which have an impact on State law
and on Federal law as well. Those provisions are comparable to the
corresponding provisions in other consular conventions, and are not
different from them in their effect.
With respect to the question of immunity from criminal jurisdiction
and the possible question that might be asked-does this treaty cut
down the jurisdiction of the States to prosecute for crimes-I think the
answer is "No," because there is already a Federal statute which makes
it impossible for States to prosecute consular officers.
Therefore, it seems to me that the answer to your question is that
there is nothing in this treaty which, to any greater extent than other
consular conventions already in force, has any effect on State law at
all.
Secretary RUSK. In other words, there are no new departures of
law in this convention, Senator.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
28 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Senator HICKENLOOrER. Mr. Secretary, why was it considered ad-
vantageous or necessary to depart from our tradition and in fact depart
from the practice of establishing a unique provision in this treaty giv,
ing consular officials immunity from prosecution for all crimes which
they might commit in this country?
We haven't done it with any other countries with the possible ex-
ception of misdemeanor activities to keep them from being Harassed or
something of that kind.
Why do we do it in this treaty !
Secretary RuSK. I think the basic reason for it is that, the systems
of government in our two countries are so dissimilar, and we have had
difficulties over the years in both directions with respect to this matter.
We felt that it would greatly simplify the relationship if we made
clear that the consular officers and employees who would function un-
der this convention would have the same diplomatic immunity as the
diplomatic officers in embassies.
I think the real reason goes back into the background of difficulties
which have arisen because of the differences in our two systems and
different approaches to these problems.
Senator approaches Do we have a limitation on the Dumber of
personnel that can be assigned to any consulate in this country !
Secretary Rung. That would be a matter for discussion and negotia-
tion and decision at the time that discussion of establishing consulates
would come up. At that time, of course, we would, as I indicated be
in touch with the committee about what the arrangements might be on
that.
But that is subject to agreement with respect to the establishment of
the consulate.
Senator IlicKENLoorER. I made some inquiry and have quite a list
of Soviet. Embassy and consular officials who have been either arrested
or expelled from this country since 1946, and it is a rather impressive
list.
The Soviets can also retaliate by showing us a substantial list of
Americans that. they have asked to leave the Soviet Union, and I think
it is very significant that we have had much more trouble in Soviet
consulates and the Soviet Embassy than with any other country in
peacetime. Is there any reason to think that we will not have a
continued need for asking Soviet officials to leave this country because
of improper activities of one kind or another!
Secretary Ruax. I think, Senator, that such cases will occur again.
We in this country have an open society where 99.9 percent of the
total information about our country is open to the public. Our ap-
proach to security and to classified information is that we cannot
close up a society but that we try to protect the information, whether
it is a particular military installation or classified material in the
hands of the Government or whatever it might be.
Now, I think we would have to acknowledge that governments at-
tempt to find out about such information, That attempt is resisted,
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 29
and that leads to incidents such as you mentioned? I think there were
some 18, over the years, as far as the Embassy in Washington is
concerned.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. As far as what?
Secretary RUSK. Since 1946 about 18, and I believe since 1949 there
have been about 20 Soviet officers or employees connected with the
United Nations. As you pointed out, there is a certain reciprocity in
this relationship. They have sent back some of ours. I don't think
that that will come to an end but I do hope that the Convention will
reduce misunderstandings and particularly be of assistance in not
letting private citizens, tourists, businessmen, exchange people, and
others get caught up in the atmosphere in which this other type of
problem arises. .-
We think this Convention can make a substantial contribution to
that.
Senator HiCKENLOOPER. Well, we may not be talking about the
same list. I have a much longer list than 18 who have been expelled
from this country. There are two different categories but it may be
twice that number. I haven't tabulated them at the present time.
Secretary RUSK. Senator, if you will excuse me, I think that part
of that list has to do with the Embassy in Washington and the other
part with the United Nations, if we are looking at the same list.
Senator HiOKENLOOPER. Well, this is not too important a detail, but
about 18 on the list to which you refer, and then I have another list of
about 17 or 18, on that order, most of whom were expelled for intel-
ligence activity. And then I have a list of a number who have been
expelled from U.N. activities or international agency activities.
Secretary RUSK. That is right.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, the numbers are not so important at
the moment except that they illustrate what has been going on.
But to make this clear, we can understand the reasons which are
traditional and historic for granting ambassadors and certain members
of their families immunity from prosecution in the countries to which
they 'are assigned. But I think it has probably been extended far too
widely to attaches or to other people working for the Embassy.
But be that as it may, it has been that way. In other words, if we
adopt this treaty, the criminal immunity which is now being given
to certain people would extend to any crime committed by any con-
sular officer or by anybody included in this list of immunity in the
convention.
Secretary RUSK. Anyone who was accredited as a consular officer
or employee who was a national of the sending state. There might
be certain employees who would not have that immunit .
Senator HIOKENLOOPER. Well, contained in the specifications in this
treaty as to the immunity?
Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. And that would include murder or any
other crime?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir. I might comment on that, sir,
that up until 1948 when the Soviet Government had a consulate in
New York they had five consular officers. In San Francisco at that
time they had two consular officers and in Los Angeles they had one
consular officer. I think it would be relevant--
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
30 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Senator HICKENLOOPER. How many did we have in Russia at that
time?
Secretary RUSK. We had two consular officers in VVladivostok. But
I would point out, ir, that in our Embassy in Moscow and in the
Soviet Embaassy here in Washington there are officers who are carry-
ing on consular functions with diplomatic immunity because they
double in brass, as it were. They are both officers of the Embassy and
consular officers,
Senator IIICKR `LooPER. Well, I think I will pass it on to somebody
else now.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, di r. Secretary.
The CIIAIRm[AN. Senator Clark.
Senator CLARK. Mr. Secretary, for the reasons you have so -ably
stated this morning, I'will support this treaty andtyour position. I
would like to ask you just, a couple of questions about. i.etail.
The State Department probably would have preferred a consular
convention which did not contain immunity if it had been possible
to negotiate one, would it, not?
Secretary RUSK. This was discussed at the time because it was a
new departure, but when we thought about it and thought about the
position of our own people, we thought this was rather a good de-
velopment. We concluded that there were .reciprocal advantages in
this so faras we were concerned.
Senator CLARK. So you made no effort. to negotiate a, treaty which
would not include immunity for consular officials?
Secretary RUSK. This point was not in our original draft because
it is not a 'part, of our general practice. But when the matter was
raised by the other side we gave it close examination. We felt that
in view of the special circumstances of the character of the two socie-
ties that it would be advantageous to us to go ahead on this basis.
Senator CLARK. So you were not reluctant to accept the. Russian
view which might. have been very difficult to change.?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct. When we found that there were
some probems here, I think we were the ones who actually proposed
the present language.
Senator CLARK. But you are quite clear that on balance this treaty
is in our intent?
Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir; I am.
Senator CLARK. Now, my understanding is that at an earlier execu-
tive hearing it was developed that the State Department had obtained
the approval of the Department of Justice to this treaty ; is that
correct?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
Senator CLARK. My understanding is that. approval was obtained
at the time when now Senator Robertennedy was Attorney General.
Secretary RUSK. That is correct., sir.
Senator CLARK. Thank you, sir; that is all.
The Clan N. Senator Aiken?
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 31
Senator AIKEN. Mr. Secretary, with how many of the Western
Hemisphere countries does the Soviet Union exchange people of the
rank of ambassador?
Secretary RUSK. There are eight : Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile,
Cuba, Mexico, the United States, and Uruguay.
Senator AIKEN. I think you are right, about that. Do they have
consular officers in any of those countries?
Secretary RUSK. It is my understanding they don't have consul-
ates as such.
Senator AIKEN. They work out of the embassy?
Secretary RUSK. They provide consular services from the embassies,
and I suppose they also have, here and there, certain trade offices.
Senator AIKEN. How does the Soviet Union deal with the Domini-
can Republic, for instance?
Secretary RUSK. They are not present there at the present time.
Senator AIKEN. They have no diplomatic relations at all?
Secretary RusK. That is correct, sir.
Senator AIKEN. I don't think I have any more questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Gore?
Senator Goi. No questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, you gave the figures for 1964 of ap-
proximately 12,000 American citizens visiting the Soviet Union. How
many citizens of the Soviet Union came to the United States in that
same year if you have that figure?
Secretary RUSK. Yes, I have that figure. During 1964 there were
204 Soviet tourists but in addition. to that there were a number who
came not as tourists but under the exchange program. Actually, in
1964 a total of 646 came under the exchange program, and according
to my figures 204 came as tourists.
The CHAIRMAN. Have these figures been increasing in recent years?
Do you happen to have available the comparable figures, say, in
1950 or 1955 or 1960?
Secretary RUSK. They have been increasing somewhat. I have a
figure here for tourists and exchange visitors far 1963, that is & total
of 729. So it would appear that it is somewhat below the total for
1964, which was 850.
The CHAIRMAN. That is, Soviet citizens coming here?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct.
The CHAIRMAN. How about Americans?
Secretary RUSK. Under the exchange program?
The CHAIRMAN. Under exchange.
Secretary RUSK. There seems to be some further increase because
during the first half of 1964 there were 160 Soviets coming here under
the exchange program; during the first half of 1965 there have been
508 so that the exchange program has been steadily growing.
The CHAIRMAN. What about the Americans going to the Soviet
Union, have they been increasing in the last several. years?
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
32 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Secretary Rusx. The tourist traffic has been increasing quite sub-
stantially, Mr. Chairman, and, of course, growing numbers of people
have been accepted there under the exchange program. You are aware
of the track meet that is over there now, for example. I wonder if we
could submit for the record, if the chairman wishes, a table covering
the past 5 years to show what the trends have been and in what cate-
gories these travelers do visit each other's country.
(The following material was subsequently furnished for the
record:)
Travel by tourists and exchange vieitora between the United States and the
U.S.S.R. for the past 5 years
American trevelere to the
U.S.S.R.
1880. ----------?------?-----------------------
1881 ................. ?------------------------
1962 ............................................
1963........................................
1884................ ------------ ...............
Tourlata
(approi1mate)
A ODD
A 000
DDO
0.
10, 000
12 000
E tamne
968
895
1,181
637
874
Soviet travelers to the
Oahe! States
Eichangltore0
via
636
053
962
689
646
The CHAIRMAN. I assume one of the reasons why you have been
concerned about having a consular treaty is the increasing number
of Americans going to the Soviet Union I
Secretary RUSH. Than is correct, sir, and our responsibilities for
offering them protection have been growing rapidly.
The CHAIRMAN. It is much easier now for American tourists to
obtain visas to go to the Soviet Union than it was 5 or 10 years ago.
Secretary RUsx. Oh, yes, sir; it is reallyy quite simple now, and the
conditions for travel there have been greatly improved from the point
of view of the ordinary tourist who would like to make contact with-
I don't want to put in too much of a commercial here because we have
been asking more people to visit America this year but it has been
simplified and they do make it easy to travel to the Soviet Union
these days.
There are restricted areas there as there are for their people in this
country, of course.
INTEREST OF OTHER COUNTRIES
The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned in your initial statement that the
Japanese, I believe, and other countries are interested in similar con-
sular conventions.
Secretary RUSK. That is our information; yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. With the same provisions with regard to immunity
and so on
Secretary Rusx. That is correct, sir.
I mentioned that in connection with relations between them and
the Soviet Union, I was not there talking about their own relations
with us. We don't yet have an instance of one of the most-favored-
nation countries asking us for the same kind of an agreement that
we have with the Soviet Union. We just don't know whether one
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 33
or the other of them might do that, or whether there would be a gen-
eral inclination to do so. But there is a general interest in this type
of agreement with the Soviet Union.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any figures with regard to trade?
Is this a reason why you anticipate the need. for this treaty?
Secretary RUSK. From the point of view of ordinary consular serv-
ices, there would be some-convenience, for example, in our having a
consulate in a place like Leningrad for providing usual services to ship-
pers and businessmen. It is particularly important to the traveling
businessmen for us to have adequate assurances that misunderstand-
ings won't occur through inadvertence or occasional misconduct, some-
thing of that sort.
I think this convention would be in support of the possibilities of
the increasingtrade between our two countries.
The CHAIRMAN. Will this convention have anything to do with or
any effect upon extradition procedures?
Secretary RUSK. None whatever, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. I believe you covered the criminal provisions as
to their effect on State law. Mr. Meeker mentioned a statute that pres-
ently forbids a State from prosecuting a consular officer.
Mr. MEEKER. Yes, I did, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Is that a law that is long on the books, or is that
something now?
Mr. MEEKER. No; it has been long on the books. It is part of the
judicial code. It is section 1351 of title 28 of the United States Code.
Senator AIKEN. Do we have an extradition treaty with the Soviet
Union?
Mr. MEEKER. No; we do not, sir.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Where does the authority of the judicial
code come from that says that a State can't prosecute a consular officer
who commits a crime. against that State within a State.
Mr. MEEKER. It comes from a provision in the Constitution which
provides for special jurisdictional arrangements with respect to for-
eign ambassadors and public ministers, and also with respect to
consuls.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. That gives the Supreme Court jurisdiction
over disputes; does it not?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes; and Congress has the right to regulate the juris-
diction of the Supreme Court and of the other Federal courts. And
it has done so in this statute.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. That is the source of the authority?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes; it is.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
34 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
The CILtIRMAN. What relation, if any, does this have to the Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations?
Mr. MEEKER. Mr. Chairman, the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations is a multilateral treaty which was prepared at a conference
held in Vienna 2 years ago. t will govern the consular relations
among the countries which become parties to it.
It will be without prejudice to any special bilateral arrangement
which individual States may elect to make with one another. If, for
example, both the United States and the U.S.S.R. should become par-
ties one day to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, our
bilateral treaty would ordinarily control in the event of any differences
in provisions btween that.. multilateral treaty and our bilateral treaty.
The CHAIRMAN, Are we not signatories to the Vienna Consular
Convention?
Mr. MEEKER. We have signed the convention, but it has not yet
been ratified and has not yet entered into force in the United States.
The CIIAIRMAN. Has the Soviet Union signed it?
Mr. MEEKER. They have not.
The C IIAIR14LAN. They have not signed it'!
Mr. MEEKER. Not yet.
The CIIAIRDrAN. Does it have provisions similar to the provisions of
this treaty?
Mr. I MEEKER. They are similar in many respects, although the
provisions on notification and access are not as stringent. and precise
as the provisions in the Soviet-United States Consular Convention,
nor are the provisions on immunity the same.
The provisions on immunity in the Vienna Convention, the multi-
lateral treaty, are comparable to the provisions in most of our standard
bilateral consular conventions. In other words, there is not full im-
munity from criminal jurisdiction for consular officers and employees.
Senator IIICKENLOOPER. Has the Soviet Union ratified this treaty
yet?
Mr. MEEKER.. No; they have not.
Senator IIiCKENLOOPER. It would not go into effect until both sides
had formall ratified, deposited their instruments of ratification; is
that correct'Mr. MEEKER. That is correct.
Secretary RUSK. That is right.
Senator ihc&ENIAOHR. V' ith regard to the immunity from criminal
prosecution, which section of the treaty contains that,
Mr. MEEKER. That is in article 19, paragraph 2, which reads :
Consular officers and employees of the consular establishment who are na-
tionals of the sending state shall enjoy Immunity from the criminal jurisdic-
tion of the receiving state.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well now, just what does that mean? The
sending state sends over a chauffeur, a cook, and maids for the con-
sulate or people of that kind but people who do not act in what we call
an official capacity in conducting business for the government.
The immunity extends to them, too; won't it?
Mr. MEEKER. The immunity will extend only to those consular of-
ficers and employees who are agreed to by the two governments. This
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 35
immunity would not extend to anyone to whom the two governments
had not . given their agreement. In effect, there would be lists of
persons who would be entitled to the immunities of article 19.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. At the present time do you know of any
people working in the Russian Embassy that are not Russian
nationals?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes, they are Soviet nationals. The situation there,
I think, is somewhat different because we have both the blue list of
diplomatic officers and also the white list of servants and other per-
sons who also have immunity if they are nationals of the sending state.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Then we would just have to refuse to admit
those people for that purpose, is that correct? That is, I am talking
about domestic employees, domestics, and people who are not, conduct-
ing official business as we normally understand it, for the sending
country, but are employees of 'convenience, let's say, housekeepers,
maids, chauffeurs, gardeners,'and things of that kind?
Mr. MEEKER. They could be admitted perfectly well., but they would
not enjoy the immunities of article 19, unless they were nationals of
the sending state, and agreed to by us, in advance.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I can't read it that way. It just says of-
ficers and employees of the consular establishment.
Secretary RUSK. Senator, the situation there is comparable to the
same problem with respect to the Embassy or the U.N. mission. I
indicated in my opening statement there were 847 Soviet citizens re-
siding in the United States. Most of those are in the Embassy or
United Nations, but of those 847 there were 249 officials and 150
dependents with diplomatic immunity. The others do not have diplo-
matic immunity, and this is customary in terms of the function and
rank of the individuals concerned and that has worked out in time
Senator HICKENLOOPER. This immunity that is contained in this
consular treaty from prosecution does not extend. to members of the
family of the consul or the consul general, is that correct? It doesn't
so state in the treaty.
Mr. MEEKER. The immunities would not extend to members of fam-
ilies.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Unless the member of the family was an
employee of the consulate?
Mr. MEEKER. And had been accepted for that purpose by the U.S.
Government.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that is all, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The CHAIRMAN. I notice in the section after that, it says:
This immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state of con-
sular officers and employees of the consular establishment may be waived by,
the sending state.
A case has recently been in the news involving this in Saigon, where
there was a murder.
Do we waive normally immunity and allow them to be tried in
Saigon or not? I world like an illustration.
Secretary RUSK. That matter is under discussion with the South
Apy~P~PorY('STPM'2 ART~F~'Clk-eP,gk)0BUlBigR000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
36 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
This individual does have diplomatic immunity and tiii question
of waiver is involved with respect to assertion of jurisdiction over
him, but that matter is still under discussion between the two govern-
ments.
The CHAIRMAN. That would be the sane case as under this treaty.
I mean you could waive the immunity, either side could waive it if
the~ y,~ cared to do so.
Secretary Rush. That is correct. But it is for the Government to
waive it, not for the individual to waive it.
The CIIAIRMAN*. That is a traditional provision in all treaties, isn't
it?
Secretary RUSK. That. is correct.
Senator GORE, Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question on that parti-
cular point.?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator GORE. Mr. Secretary, although the case of this particular
individual is questionable, you say you had diplomatic immunity
which you have not to date waived, he was nevertheless apprehended
and arrested by the Saigon Government, was he not?
Secretary RUSK. He turned himself in, Senator, and our consular
officers there arranged for his proper safeguarding during the period
of interrogation. These formalities have not been completed yet.
But it does raise some very interesting problems about the jurisdiction
of the courts.
Senator GORE. In that connection, 1 am ingVhiring as to the extent
of immunity. I thought, the immunity went beyond prosecution. I
thought it included immunity from arrest and interrogation.
Secretary Russ. Well, in the ease of this particular individual,
I think this is not a very. good case to test the issue of immunity be-
cause he turned himself in and has been cooperating fully with the
authorities on a voluntary basis so it does not raise as yet quite the same
issues.
But again these are rather complicated problems possibly involving
some precedents, and it may be that by the end of the day we will have
an announcement there as to the way in which this has been worked out
with the South Vietnamese Government.
I just don't know at the moment how those conversation,, stand.
Senator GORE. Mr. Secretary, if the U.S. Government takes the posi-
tion that a diplomatic official has no immunity unless he Himself claims
it, or on the other hand if by so-called voluntary submission or action
this diplomatic official can waive immunity, then such rights as the
U.S. Government itself may have will be absent when the right of
waiver, whether voluntary or quasi-voluntary, is within the hands of
the official himself.
I don't think that is a sound position.
Secretary Russ. Well, Senator, again, it is a little difficult to get
into the underlying principles of law in this particular case at this
particular time. It. has been a very short period. He does not have
any authority to waive any immunity himself. That is a matter for
governments to do. As of the time that I left the Department of State
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 37
this morning, I did not have the answer as to what had been decided
in consultation between our Government and the South Vietnamese
Government. The South Vietnamese Government, again as of this
morning, had not been exercising the authority of its criminal jurisdic-
tion over this man. He had come and presented himself, and he had
cooperated fully and he told his story.
Senator GORE. Well, Mr. Secretary, that doesn't answer my question.
Even though he had voluntarily submitted himself, the question is
whether the Government of South Vietnam has not trespassed upon
the diplomatic immunity by retention and by interrogation.
Secretary RUSK. Well, Senator, there has been, so far as I under-
stand it, no arrest, no process served, and, as a matter of fact, where
he is may be the safest place for him from his own point of view.
Senator GORE. Well, however that may be the question still remains
whether or not under the circumstances which you have described
there has not been trespass upon the official immunity of an employee
of the Government of the United 'States.
Secretary RUSK. Well, these matters don't resolve themselves at the
instant in which the question arises. This is for governments to con-
sider and make a determination on. But I would add in this case,
Senator, that the United States does not have jurisdiction over this
man, and
Senator GORER. Does not have what?
Secretary RUSK. Does not have jurisdiction over this man.
Senator GoRE. How has that been?
Secretary RUSK. He has committed no crime against the United
States. He cannot be tried in an American court.
The CHAIRMAN. What was that, I didn't hear that last remark.
Did you say he could not be tried
Secretary RUSK. I said this man could not be tried in an American
court. He has committed no crime against the law of the United
States, although he has said he killed a man out there, killed an
American.
Senator GoRE. I am not attempting to criticize the Department in
this case, but the statements which you have made certainly arouse my
curiosity, because behind the Iron Curtain they seem to have a way of
inducing so-called voluntary action, and if the Department takes the
position in all cases which you have taken here, it seems to me it raises
very serious questions and problems.
Secretary RUSK. So far as I know, Senator, I haven't taken a posi-
tion on this except that this matter is being discussed between our
Government and the South Vietnamese Government.
In the case of an incident, in the case that you are concerned about-
and properly so-if we insist upon the immunity, it is not the privilege
of the individual concerned to waive it. He has no authority to waive.
Immunity is a governmental function, and the assertion of the waiver
of immunity is -a governmental matter and does not rest with the dis-
cretion of the individual.
Senator GORE. Well, in the case that the individual does volunteer
to the jurisdiction of a foreign government, does that foreign govern-
ment have the power to exercise such jurisdiction in the absence of an
assertion of immunity on the part of the Government of the United
States?
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
38 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Secretary Rtsx. Well, I will ask my legal friend to comment on
that in a second. If you assume that the question of asylum is not in-
volved here
Senator GoRE. Question of what?
Secretary Rusx. Asylum, political asylum, let's exclude that if we
may. Then we would have a right to require the other government
to deliver the man over to us who has diplomatic immunity.
Senator GoRE. You assert that power?
Secretary Rusx. Yes, sir.
oenator GoiE. That is right?
Secretary RusK. That is correct.
Senator GORE. But you have not exercised it in this case?
Secretary Rues. I might be able to answer that-you mean in the
Saigon case?
Senator GoiIE. Yes.
Secretary Rusx. I might be able to answer that tomorrow morn-
ing, sir, but I am not able to answer it at 11:25.
Senator GoRE. I think you have answered the important thing:
You do have the right to assert jurisdiction and the employee him-
self has no right to----
Secretary Rusx. We have the right, sir, to deal with the question of
immunity, but as I pointed out, we do not have the right to assert
jurisdiction over this man or the crime that he said he committed or
the act that he said
Senator GoRE. Do you have the right to deny jurisdiction of the
Saigon government?
Secretary Rusx. Yes, sir; I suppose we would.
Senator GoRE. This you have not done?
Secretary Rusx. That is correct, so far as I know now.
Senator HICxENIoorEit. To deny the jurisdiction of the Saigon
government we would have to claim jurisdiction for this man.
Senator GoRE. Yes.
Secretary. Rusx. Then there would be no jurisdiction over this
man by anyone.
The CIIAnuiAN. He would go free.
Senator GonE. At least this poses some interesting problems.
Secretary Rusx. It does indecd, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Don't you have any precedents of this kind? Has
it ever occurred in our History- where there has been a murder sim-
ilar to this, not necessarily with the same motive, but a murder?
Secretary Rusx. We have looked through the record, Senator, and
tested the memory of our very experienced stuff and we haven't
been able to find a preeedenttliat seems relevant here.
The CII MMAN. There has been no case where you asserted immu-
nity and a murderer has gone. free?
Secretary Rusx. The people who have diplomatic immunity have
behaved themselves rather well in such matters.
The CIIAnti4IAN. Or, on the contrary, are there precedents where in
an apparently clear case like this you normally would waive immunity
and Now him to be tried there? Have there been cases like that?
Secretary Rusx. But we just don't know, sir. We haven't had the
Approv'For Release 2005/08/16: CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 39
Senator HICKENLOOPER. We had a reverse case on that here a few
years ago, didn't we, where some member of an embassy here shot
somebody?
Secretary RUSK. Yes; I believe there has been one
Senator HICKENLOOPER. And they claimed immunity for him and
took him back home. I don't know what happened to him.
Secretary RUSK. Oh, yes; I believe there was a case.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. This was 4 or 5 years ago.
Secretary RUSK. But he was taken home or, rather, he went home.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether they prosecuted him or not?
Do all countries have this same situation in which they would not have
jurisdiction at home to prosecute him in cases where it was committed
abroad? Is that a very common principle?
Secretary RUSK. Not every country has the same situation that we
do. Our law as I understand it, rests very heavily upon the common
law principle of the locus of the act.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
Secretary RUSK. And under other systems of law, it can be quite
different where the law runs to the person rather than the place.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. So that in some countries the fact that you
killed another citizen of that same country would give jurisdiction of
trying him, is that right?
Secretary RUSK. ' T think it is possible yes.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I should ask Mr. Meeker this question as
legal counselor of the State Department. Would, there be any reason
why we could not enact a statute in this country providing for pun-
ishment of a person who could enjoy immunity in another country
from prosecution, to bring him back here and try him for a crime that
he had committed while he was within the employ of the U.S. Gov-
ernment and while he was under the blanket of immunity if we cared
to claim it.
We do it with the armed services, bring him back here and try him.
Mr. MEEKER. That precise question has never been tested in the
Supreme Court. What has been tested is the assertion of military
jurisdiction over civilians accompanying the Armed Forces, and the
Supreme Court has held that such criminal prosecutions under mili-
tary jurisdiction are not legally possible.
The question that you asked is one we have discussed in the past
with the Department of Justice. They have felt that there are very
substantial problems of a constitutional nature with a statute of that
sort.
In fact, they have felt there were sufficient doubts so that no such
legislation has been presented to the Congress for its consideration.
Senator GoRE. Well, Mr. Secretary, I only raise these questions
to suggest that you be very careful unless there be precedential conse-
quences from the handling of this case.
Secretary RUSK. I understand.
Senator Goiu. This is considerably magnified by the practice of
Iron Curtain countries to induce so-called voluntary actions on the
part of our citizens who may be in trouble.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
40 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Secretary RuaK. We have ourselves, as a government, complete
control over the issue of immunityy , whether or not it is asserted on
behalf of one of our officers abroad. In the particular case in Saigon,
American officials have been with this man throughout the entire
proceeding to assure his being properly treated.
The CHAIBRMAN. I think it is important to understand what the is-
sues are. I wonder if we are through with this if you would elaborate,
Mr. Meeker, about the tax exemptions because that is always a matter
of importance, under article 21, I believe. Just explain what this
means.
Mr. MEEKER. Article 21 provides real estate, of which the sending
state or persons acting on its behalf is owner or lessee, and which
real estate is used for either diplomatic or consular purposes, and
this includes residences of personnel attached to the embassy and
consulate, that real estate shall be exempt, from taxation either State
or local, other than assessments which might be made for local im-
provements or services rendered, such as water and sewer charges.
There is also an exemption in article 22 from income tax on any
consular officer or employee who is not a national of the receiving
state and who also is not .a. person who has been admitted for per-
manent residence. There is an exemption from the payment of any
taxes on his official salary. Of course, he 1111 ht' conceivably have
other income and that would not be exempt. What article 22 exempts
is simply his official salary wages, or allowances,
The CHAIRMAN. Does that extend to the employees of the consulate
other than the officials?
Mr. MEEKER. It. extends to whatever officers or employees are noti-
fied to the U.S, Government and accepted by us in that capacity.
The CHAIRMAN. And they would have to be nationals of the send-
ing state. If they employed local people it would not affect them.
Mr. MEEKER. They would have to be either nationals of the send-
ing state or a third state, They could not be either American citizens
or aliens who have been admitted to the United States for permanent
residence.
The CII n rAN. Yes.
How about article 23; what does that deal with?
Mr. MEEKER. Article 23 goes on to deal with other tax questions
and provides once again that a consular officer or employee who is
not a national of the receiving state and has not been admitted for
permanent residence should be exempt from the payment of all taxes
or similar charges by the receiving state or any o? its political sub-
divisions for the payment of which the officer or employee of the
consular establishment would otherwise be legally liable.
This relates to other kinds of taxes which might be imposed directly
on the consular officer or employee.
The CHAIRMAN. A sales tax. Is that presently true of diplomatic
officials?
Mr. MEEKER. Yes. They are exempt from the District of Colum-
bia sales tax.
The CHAIRMAN. If they go into a store to buy a necktie they don't
pay the sales tax?
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 41
Mr. MEEKER.. They have an exemption from sales tax.
The CHAIRMAN. I didn't know that.
Mr. MEEKER. On all kinds of merchandise.
The CHAIRMAN. That must confront the stores with a lot of prob-
lems, doesn't it?
Mr. MEEKER. The diplomatic personnel have cards of identity which
show their status and show that they are entitled to an exemption,
and when they do that then the tax is simply not charged.
The CHAIRMAN. They travel on an airplane; do they claim the tax
exemption on a travel tax?
Mr. MEEKER. They are exempt from the tax on airplane tickets.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. It says right on the ticket so much tax.
Mr. MEEKER. This is an exemption which has been granted in Amer-
ican tax law for a long time.
The CHAIRMAN. You said a moment ago that the Department of
Justice approved this treaty under the previous administration. The
present administration has been consulted about it?
Secretary RUSK. The present Attorney General has also approved
it, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Why did you leave the record to show as if it was
only approved by the previous one?
Secretary RUSK. I was asked about the previous one, sir. I just
didn't add the present one, but I am happy to do so at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, the present Attorney General does approve
of this treat`
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Obviously from some of our mail, some of our citi-
zens are concerned about the problem of espionage. This might in
some way enhance the possibility of it; I think if you have anything
further to say on that point, please do so. I personally don't see very
much difference, if any, between this and what presently is going on.
Senator CASE. Mr. Chairman may I ask a question?
I just want to call, specifically, attention to the testimony by Mr.
Hoover, of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, before the House Sub-
committee on Appropriations when he was there. I think for the
regular budget of the Bureau for the fiscal year which began last July,
he made a very specific statement about this, and related it to this par-
ticular treaty. I would like you to comment on the general point and
also on the specific warning by Mr. Hoover, which would be most ap-
propriate for the record.
The CHAIRMAN. Did you ask him to comment on that?
Senator CASE. I just suggested supplementing your own inquiry.
I think it would be desirable to have a general statement in addition
to a specific comment Capon the concern expressed, by Mr. Hoover for
the record.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes, I was going to ask him to comment on that
statement of Mr. Hoover who is part of the Department of Justice; is
he not?
views about this.
Secretary RUSK. I have already commented on that point, Mr. Chair-
man. I would be glad to comment further.. I will start by saying
Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me for the record we should have your
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
42 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
that the Department of State and Department of Justice both recom-
mend the approval of this consular convention.
The idea that there are going to be many consulates in many parts
of the country does not conform to expectations here. We will be
discussing, at the appropriate time and in full consultation with the
appropriate committees of the Congress, the possibilitty of establishing,
in our cases a consulate in Leningrad, The Soviet Union would pre-
sumably wish a consulate in a comparable city in this country. But
it does not seem to me that we can deal with the problem of security
on the basis of closing up the country.
We are an open society. Our problem is to protect our secrets,
whether they are military installations or classified information in the
hands of our Government. We undertake that in order not to have
a closed society in this country, and if those who have the, responsi-
bility for protecting secret information succeed in dong it,, there is
no particular damage in having a few extra people added to the tens
of millions who wander freely about the country observing and seeing
and reporting on what they see and find.
The key problem here is the protection of classified information in
an open society, and we do that at the source of the information rather
than trying to close the society to those who might be curious about
such things.
INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS AND DIPLOMACY
The CIL n MAN. I was under the impression, I am no expert in this
field, that the serious intelligence work of all countries, not just this
one, but all of them, are done by agencies specifically trained and pre-
pared for that and this has been so since the beginning of time,
In an embassy, officials necessarily carry on intelligence work.
But it goes beyond that. The major part is traditionally carried
out by a unique agency, such as the famous Scotland Yard in England.
Is that not so?
Secretary Russ. That is correct, sir.
One of the classical functions of diplomats is to report to govern-
ments on what they observe in the countries in which they are postedd.
The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.
Secretary Rusg. That is one of the functions of sending ambassa-
dors and ministers and consuls abroad. But the problem of espio-
nage is a very special one. ' Te haves as Senator Hickenlooper pointed
out, asked a number of Soviet officials to leave this country in con-
nection with that kind of activity, They have sent some of our peo-
ple home alleging that that kind of activity occurred. But that is a
very special. problem, and I have great condence in the ability of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and others who might be charged
with such duties to give us adequate protection in these matters.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, just to put it in perspective, this is traditional
with all governments. During the thirties, there were many rumors,
1 don't know that I considered them as a fact, there was a good deal
of this going on with re aid to the Germans and Nazis, not only here
but throughout South America. There used to be all kinds of stories
about this, that all governments particularly in times of tension main-
tain rather extensive covert operations in this field.
The point I am trying to make is that it doesn't seem to me that
consular treaties should themselves be judged, rejected, or approved on
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 43
this basis. While that is a problem and always will be, I suppose,
until we have some idyllic world government, but as long as we have
nation states this is going to be a problem.
To allow it to influence us in our consideration of any particular
consular treaty doesn't seem correct to me. While it is relevant, it is
not an essential consideration in a consular treaty. Do you agree?
Secretary RUSE. And to the extent, sir, that we can build some
peace in the world and establish normal relations, the problems raised
by espionage diminish. It is in periods of tension and crisis and con-
troversy and rivalry and armed confrontations where the problem of
espionage grows.
Little by little we would hope we could move steadily toward a time
when nations are not looking at each other with such intense curiosity
from that point of view, and eople can be a little more normal in
their relations. We are not thiere yet. But in order to facilitate
travel and facilitate trade and business relationships and exchange
programs, it is a small step. It might be a tiny step in looking at the
total problem but a step worth taking.
We have other. interests beyond worrying about the curiosity of
governments.
Senator CASE. Mr. Chairman I think it is only fair to everyone to
make this further comment. hat as I read Mr. Hoover's further
testimony, including an insertion that was put into the record by him,
I do find that he said this would make the job of the FBI more diffi-
cult. I do not find that he said that he would oppose the treaty on this
or any other ground.
I think that is a fair statement.
The CHAIRMAN. I suppose you could say the same thing about tour-
ists. That even increasing the large number of tourists would make
the job more difficult to some extent because tourists might undertake
some form of espiona e, might they not?
Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. So because of that we wouldn't exclude tourism,
would we?
Secretary RUSE. Tourists from any country, Mr. Chairman. Tour-
ists from any country.
The CHAIRMAN. And the official government's policy is to encourage
tourism, isn't it?
Secretary RUSE. Yes, indeed. We are drumming up tourist busi-
ness. I :talk to foreign ministers about tourism frequently when we
get them over here.
The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions?
Senator HICIt.ENLOOPER. Just one other question, Mr. Chairman, on
a collateral matter. We have had under consideration for some years
the question of air routes to Moscow and from Moscow here. That
seems to be in the doldrums in some way.
What has happened to that?
Secretary RUSE. It is still in 'a state of suspension, Senator. We
have not moved ahead on that because there have been some general
problems in our relations that have stood in the way. But this is
another or e e m it be eosCIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
Apprprove ve or a ease e 20 /08/1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
44 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
opportunity arises. There will be required in any event after the oon-
c usion of such an agreement a good deal of technical discussion be-
tween the airlines and the air officials on actual arrangements. But
that has been marking time for the past several months.
Senator IIICKENLOOPEa. In other words, we haven't got very far
with it yet.
Secretary Rusi. It has been initialed but it has not been signed, and
we have not yet proceeded on the basis that it has been concluded.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I see.
Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. One last question. I understand that if this should
be approved then an agreement specifically providing for one or more
consulates will be submitted for consideration to this committee.
Secretary RUSK. Not an agreement as such. I indicated that we
would consult with the committee with respect to the discussions that
might lead to the opening of a consulate in the Soviet Union or their
opening a consulate here. But such an opening of consulates would
not require any further formal agreement.
The CHAIRMAN. It would not require ratification of the agreement.
It would be an executive agreement in furtherance of this particular
convention?
Secretary Ru8K. Yes; we open and close consulates frequently. We
closed, I think, 13 last year, if I remember and we opened almost the
same number in new places. But we do that by arrangements between
the executive branches of the respective Governments rather than by
1 lative treaty action.
The CHAIRMAN. Any further question, Senator Case?
Senator CASE. With regard to the matter of immunity this agree-
ment formalizes and does not broaden formal practice and traditional
observance, is that correct?
Secretary RUSK. It does broaden it insofar as the usual consular
convention is concerned, since it does appl the type of criminal im-
munity that is normal to diplomatic establishments.
Senator CASE. To that extent a larger number of people will be
given diplomatic immunity.
Secretary RUSK. That is correct.
QUESTION OF DIPLOMATIC TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS
Senator CASE. Which leads me to my question, may I not expect a
response from the Department of State to a suggestion I made many
weeks ago about hanndlin. traffic violations and violations of motor
vehicle laws in various States and in the District of Columbia? I
hoped that the suggestions I made there, that this matter not be
allowed to run on as in the past may be given serious consideration.
I would be glad to discuss it informally in advance of any formal
answer.
Secretary RUSK. All right, sir, I will be glad to talk to you about it,
Senator. This is a troublesome and vexatious kind of problem, It
does carry with it problems of reciprocity.
Senator CASE. Of course.
Secretary RUSK. For us all over the world and the other way
around, and we ourselves insist upon very high standard of compli-
ance with local laws and regulations in such matters.
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 45
We are trying to find an answer to that that would be generally
acceptable and will meet the need. I think we have made some im-
provement but we are not home yet on it.
Senator CASE. The problem is perhaps more difficult for us'because
we are the host to more diplomats than other countries, and also be-
cause of the diversity of our jurisdiction.
But nevertheless, I hope that the suggestion that I made specifically
of a point system, which is just one of many possibilities, would be
given very serious consideration because I think violations are in-
tolerant at times.
The CHAIRMAN. I will insert in the record a memo from Mr. Meeker
dated July 8,1965.
(The document referred to follows:)
To : H-Mr. John S. Leahy, Jr.
From : L-Leonard C. Meeker.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
THE LEGAL ADVISER,
July 8, 1965.
Subject : Comparative commentary and analysis of the United States-Soviet
Union Consular Convention.
There is attached for transmission to the staff of the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee a comparative commentary and analysis of the Consular Con-
vention Between the United States and the Soviet Union. This paper contains
virtually an article-by-article commentary upon provisions in the Soviet Consular
Convention, along with a brief discussion as to areas of similarity and differences
between this convention, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and the
United States-Japanese Consular Convention.
iAttachment : As stated.
COMPARATIVE COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS
The Consular Convention With the Soviet Union was signed on June 1, 1964.
With few exceptions, hereafter considered, the convention is similar in sub-
stance to other consular conventions previously concluded by the United States
with a number of countries. The following commentary and analysis will dis-
cuss the principal articles of this Consular Convention, and will indicate whether
it differs in substance from the Consular Convention Between the United States
and Japan, which entered into force on August 1, 1964, and the Vienna Conven-
tion on Consular Relations, signed by the United States on April 24, 1963.
A consular convention is a treaty in which the contracting parties regulate
the activities and functions of consular establishments and their officers. and
employees. Such conventions provide, in addition, certain privileges and im-
munities for the consular establishments and their personnel. Privileges and
immunities are provided in order to enable the consular officers of each con-
tracting party to carry out their consular functions, inter alia, to assist and
protect their nationals in the territory of the other party, in the manner au-
thorized by the convention.
The impact of this convention on State law in the United States is limited
to A few matters, such as tax exemptions, in which consular conventions have
traditionally affected State law. The convention would not empower the Federal
Government to pass laws in any matters affecting State or local activities which
heretofore it did not already possess. The convention also does not confer any
power on consular officers with respect to the practice of law other than in
accordance with the requirements of the applicable State law.
Article 1 is a -definition of terminology appearing throughout the remaining
30 articles of the convention. Comparable articles, with a similar purpose, are
found in the Consular Convention With Japan, and in the Vienna Convention
on Consular Relations.
Articles 2 through 6 regulate such matters as the opening of consular estab.
lishments, the appointment and recognition of consular officers and employees,
the nationality of consular officers, and the status of a temporary head of a
consular establishment. The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations considers
~~}~ reate }utilizing articles 2 through 4 and 6 through 24
Ap~o'co"ve'rhge ~Qg& aaIRR1a?i9BA0338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
46 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION
Article 2(1), providing that a consular establishment may be opened in the
territory of the receiving state only with that states consent, Is of special interest.
This provision highlights the actuality that the reciprocal opening of consulates
by the United States and the Soviet Union does not automatically follow from
the conclusion of this convention. The entry Into force of this convention will
simply provide that such consulates, when and if opened, will perform their re-
spective functions pursuant to an agreed set of rules. Article 4 of the Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations and article 3 of the Consular Convention With
Japan contain similar provisions.
Article 2(8) Is designed to Insure that no person in the receiving state not
already entitled to diplomatic Immunity can be appointed as a consular officer or
employee and granted full immunity from the criminal jurisdiction pursuant to
article 11)(2). No comparable provision Is found in the Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations or the Consular Convention With Japan, since these conven-
tions do not provide a similar immunity from the local jurisdiction for consular
officers.
Article 3, which Is a limitation on the nationality of consular officers, must be
considered in relation to other provisions of the convention which limit the
privileges and immunities to be accorded to consular officers and employees who
are either nationals of or permanently resident in the receiving state. Such
limitations are found In articles 19(2), 20(2), 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26. Provisions
which have the very same purpose are found In article 71 of the Vienna Conven-
tion on Consular Relations and article 25 of the Consular Convention With
Japan.
Article 5 concerning the acquisition of consular premises is Identical to article
30 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. A more comprehensive re-
lated provision may be found in article 7 of the Consular Convention With
Japan.
Articles 7 through 15 set forth the usual consular functions and the obligations
and duties of the receiving state with respect thereto. These functions, many
of which are Included In article 7, Include protecting the rights and interests of
the sending state and its nationals, furthering the development of commercial,
economic, cultural, and scientific relations, the authentication of legal documents,
and certifying as to translations. A similar listing of consular functions is
found in section 5 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, while these
functions are covered In greater detail in articles 15 and 17 of the Consular Con-
vention With Japan.
In article 9 the receiving state undertakes the obligation, If relevant Infor-
mation is available, to inform the consular establishment of the death of a
national of the sending state. A similar provision is found in article 37 of the
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
In article 10 the powers of consular: officers are outlined with respect to the
estates of their deceased nationals and the transfer of their property. This
article is virtually identical with the estates article contained in the Consular
Convention With Japan, with the exception of paragraph (4) thereof. This
paragraph (4) subjects the consular officer only to the civil jurisdiction of the
receiving state, thus conforming with article 19(2) of the convention. Article
5(9) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations merely indicates a con-
sular officer may safeguard the interests of his nationals in cases of succession,
in accordance with the laws and regulations of the receiving state.
Article 12 is one of the most important articles of the convention. This article,
as supplemented by the protocol (which is an Integral part of the convention} ,
provides that a consular officer has the right to communicate with, assist, and
advise any national of the sending state. The access of such nationals to their
consular establishment can in no way be restricted by the receiving state, This
article also provides that the receiving state shall immediately inform a con-
sular officer of the sending state about the arrest or detention of a national of
the sending state; "immediately" is defined in the protocol as from 1 to 3 days.
The article further provides that a consular officer of the sending state shall
t ithout delay have the right to visit and communicate with a national of the
sending state who is under arrest or otherwise detained or imprisoned ; "without
delay" Is defined as being from 2 to 4 days. The protocol also interprets article
12 as providing a continuing right of consular access to the national.
Article 36(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations requires the
receiving state to inform the consular post without delay if a national of the
sending state is arrested or committed to prison pending trial, or is detained In
any other manner, if the national so requests. Article 36(c) of the Vienna Con-
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH THE SOVIET UNION 47
vention on Consular Relations provides consular officers the right to visit their
nationals in custody unless the national opposes such a visit. Article 16 of the
Japanese Consular. Convention likewise requires the receiving state to inform
a consular officer of the sending state if one of his nationals is confined awaiting
trial or is otherwise detained, if the national so requests. This obligation is to
be carried out immediately. The consular officer is given the right to visit his
national without delay.
Articles 13 and 15 cover the customary activities of consular officers in regard
to shipping and aviation matters. The Vienna Convention on Consular Rela-
tions considers shipping and aviation In an abbreviated fashion, while articles
19 through 29 of the Japanese Consular Convention regulate these matters in far
greater detail.
Articles 16 through 29 set forth the rights, privileges, and immunities pertain-
ing to the consular establishment and to the officers and employees thereof. For
example, article 16 provides that the national flag and shield with the national
coat of arms may be displayed. A similar provision is in article 8 of the Consular
Convention With Japan, and in article 29 of the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations. Article 17 states that the consular establishment and the archives
thereof are inviolable vis-a-vis receiving state authorities, who may not enter
without appropriate approval. Similar inviolability is accorded to the consular
archives by article 33 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and article
8(3) (b) of the Consular Connvention With Japan. Both article 31(b) of the
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and article 8(4) of the Consular Con-
vention With Japan provide that, in case of such matters as fire or other disaster
requiring prompt protective action, authorities of the receiving state may enter
the consular premises. Precedent for the absolute inviolability provision of the
Consular Convention With the Soviet Union is found in the 1928 Havana Con-
sular Agents Convention, now in force between the United States and 12 Latin
American countries.
Article 18 establishes the right of the consular establishment to have full comr
munication with the government of the sending state. Article 35 of the Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations provides, as does article 18 of the Soviet
convention, that diplomatic couriers and pouches may be used by consular estab-
lishments. While article 35 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and
article 10 of the Consular Convention With Japan go on at some length in describ-
ing the privileges and immunities associated with the consular courier and
consular pouch, it is the intent of article 18 of the Soviet convention that the
rules of customary international law and practice concerning the diplomatic
pouch and diplomatic couriers will govern this phase of full consular communi-
cation.
Article 19 concerns consular immunities. Article 19 (1) is a standard provision
in U.S. consular conventions and provides that consular officers and employees
are not subject to the civil jurisdiction of the receiving state in matters relating
to their official activities. Whether or not a matter is considered to relate to the
official activities of such personnel is a decision for the courts of the receiving
state. Article 43 (1) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and article
11(1) (a) of the Consular Convention With Japan provide a similar rule.
Article 19(2) provides full immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the
sending state for consular personnel who are nationals of the sending state. This
provision will afford maximum protection to American consular personnel in the
Soviet Union against arbitrary police action. On the other hand, three related
provisions of the convention will protect against any abuse of such immunity
from criminal jurisdiction. Article 2(7) recognizes, first of all, the right of the
receiving state to declare consular personnel persona non grata. In this connec-
tion, since article 2(6) requires that all consular officers and employees must be
notified to us "in advance," we would be able to screen such persons, and, by
means of a persona non grata action, eliminate any whom we did not wish to act
in a consular capacity clothed with full immunity from criminal jurisdiction.
In this respect, article 28 is also important in that it states a duty for all persons
enjoying such immunity to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving
state, including traffic regulations.
Second, article 2(3) specifically provides that the receiving state must give
prior approval to the head of the consular post before he assumes his duties.
Finally, article 2(8) provides that the sending state may not appoint as a con-
sular officer or employee a national of the sending state already present in the
receiving state unless such official already possesses diplomatic immunity.
Approved For Release 2005108/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
 Approved For Release 2005/08/16 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1
48 CONSULAR CONVENTION WITH TBE SOVIET UNION
The convention's provisions on Immunity from criminal jurisdiction have a
potential application, by virtue of most-favored-nation clauses in other treaties,
to consular personnel of some 35 other countries. Such most-favored-nation
treatment will be operative only if these countries so request and agree to provide
reciprocal treatment to U.S. consular personnel in those countries.
The Department has inquired concerning known criminal prosecutions against
foreign consular officers In the last 25 years. There has been only 1 conviction in
the 15 cases we have found. At least 10 of the cases (including 6 involving traffic
violations) were dismissed because State courts lacked jurisdiction over consular
officials by reason of a Federal statute-28 U.S.C. 1351. On the basis of this
experience, the Department of State concludes that the problem of criminal
jurisdiction with respect to consuls is one of readily manageable proportions.
The related provision of the Japanese Consular Convention is article 11(1) (b)
which provides that a consular officer shall be exempt from arrest or prosecution
in the receiving state except when charged with the commission of a crime which,
upon conviction, might subject the individual guilty thereof to Imprisonment for
1 year or more. A similar rule is found in article 41(1) of the Vienna Conven-
tion on Consular Relations which provides that a consular officer shall not be
liable to arrest or detention pending trial except in the case of a grave crime.
Article 20 discusses the manner in which consular officers or employees give
testimony as witnesses. Testimony is required on all matters except those con-
cerning the official activities of such persons; only the locus of the testimony is
made adjustable by the Convention. A similar provision is found in article 11(5)
of the Consular Convention With Japan.
Articles 21 through 23 provide tax exemptions for lands and buildings of the
sending state in the receiving state, as well as certain tax exemptions for con-
sular officers or employees. Articles 12 and 13 of the Consular Convention With
Japan, and articles 32, 49 and 51 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
provide for similar tax exemptions.
Articles 24 and 25 provide for consular personnel exemptions from compulsory
military service and alien registration. Comparable provision may be found in
articles 46, 47, and 52 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and in
article 9 of the Consular Convention With Japan.
Article 26 provides customs privileges for the consular establishment and to
consular officers and employees, on the same basis as Is granted by the receiving
state to the diplomatic mission of the sending state and the personnel thereof.
Articles 14 of the Japanese Consular Convention and 50 of the Vienna Convention
on Consular Relations provide equivalent privileges with respect to articles Im-
ported for the official use of the consular establishment; and for consular officers,
while limiting the duty-free import privilege of consular employees to articles
Imported by them at the time of their first Installation.
Article 27 authorizes freedom of travel for consular officers, subject to the laws
and regulations of the receiving state. Consequently it does not obviate the nec-
essity of compliance with regulations providing for closed or restricted zones and
modes of travel. An identical provision is found at article 34 of the Vienna Con-
vention on Consular Relations.
Article 28 sets forth a duty for consular officers and employees enjoying privi-
leges and Immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state.
A similar obligation Is contained In articles 55(1) of the Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations and 26(3) of the Consular Convention with Japan.
Article 29 relates to the performance of consular functions by diplomatic offi-
cers. Likewise provisions are contained in article 6(3) of the Consular Conven-
tion with Japan and In article 70 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Article 30 contains the final provisions relating to entry into force of the
Convention. Article 27 of the Consular Convention with Japan is similar, while
articles 74 through 79 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations contain
more extensive and detailed provisions, due to the multilateral nature of the
Convention.
The CHAIRMAN. Anything further you wish to say, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary RUSK. I think not. I think not, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you very much.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.
The Committee is adjourned.
(Whereupon, at 11;50 a.m., the committee adjourned, subject to call
of the Chair,)
Approved For Release 2005/08/16 :QIA-RDP70B00338R000300040028-1