Sofa Agreements Us

Sofa Agreements Us

In every discussion on SAAs, it should be taken into account that there are at least 10 agreements that are currently classified as documents. Agreements are classified on national security grounds. You are not dealt with in this report. While NATO`s SOFA offers extensive language for establishing jurisdiction, the United States is open to many SOFAs that appear to have a very fundamental rule for determining jurisdiction. Some agreements contain a single sentence according to which U.S. personnel must obtain a status equivalent to that of administrative and technical staff of the U.S. Embassy in that country. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961 establishes classes of personnel with different levels of legal protection.30 Administrative and technical personnel enjoy, inter alia, “immunity from the criminal justice of the host State”. 31 Consequently, a SOFA which grants U.S. personnel as administrative and technical staff immunity from criminal justice during the host country. Four years after Germany`s accession to NATO, the countries concluded an agreement for the implementation of the 1953 NATO SOFA.71 The agreement provided for additional agreements on NATO agreements and specific to the relationship between the United States and Germany. The agreements to transpose and add to NATO`s SOFA cover more than 200 pages and cover details of the daily intervention of US forces and US personnel in Germany.

A SOFA should clarify the conditions under which the foreign army can operate. As a rule, purely military and operational matters, such as the location of bases and access to facilities, are covered by separate agreements. A SOFA focuses more on legal issues related to military persons and property. This may include issues such as entry and exit into the country, tax obligations, postal services or the conditions of employment of nationals of the host country, but the most controversial issues are civil and criminal justice on bases and personnel. For civil cases, SOFAs provide for how civilian damages caused by the armed forces are identified and paid. Criminal issues vary, but the typical provision in U.S. SOFA is that U.S. courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed either by a soldier against another soldier or by a soldier as part of his or her military duty, but the host country retains jurisdiction over other crimes.


Comments are closed.