wherever located and by whomsoever held, are immune from search, unless such immunity is expressly waived, and from confiscation; and its archives are inviolable (22 U.S.C. 288a (c)).

In addition to the Public Law 79-291, the Organization of American States is covered by Public Law 93-149 of November 7, 1973 (22 U.S.C. 288g), and the Agreement [relating to privileges and immunities] between the United States of America and the Organization of American States [signed and entered into force on March 20, 1975; TIAS 8089; 26 UST 1025]. Both the Statute and the Agreement deal with privileges and immunities of representatives of member states (other than the United States) to the Organization, permanent observers to the Organization, and members of the staffs of both. . . . Representatives and permanent observers to the Organization, as well as members of their staffs, are accorded privileges and immunities, subject to corresponding conditions and obligations, as are enjoyed by diplomatic envoys accredited to the United States.

OEA/Ser.G., CP/doc. 742/77, Oct. 5, 1977, pp 5-6.

Motor Vehicles

In response to questions posed by the Subcommittee on International Operations of the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives, subsequent to the hearings of May and June of 1977, the Department of State answered a series of questions dealing with the use of motor vehicles by diplomats in the United States as well as by U.S. diplomats abroad. These questions concerned such issues as efforts by the Department of State to induce diplomats to pay for their traffic tickets and to obtain in certain circumstances waivers of immunity, the practice of the United States with reference to providing license plates to diplomats, and practice of foreign states with regard to the issuance of traffic tickets to U.S. diplomatic personnel posted abroad. Set forth below are some of the questions and answers dealing with these topics:

Question 4. A Washington Post article indicated that U.S. diplomats get a substantial discount on gasoline and do not have to pay traffic fines in Italy, American diplomatic personnel are given lenient treatment by French traffic policemen and U.S. diplomats do not have to pay parking fines in Israel. Is this kind of treatment usually accorded U.S. personnel in foreign countries?

Answers. The Department does not have statistics on specific treatment accorded U.S. diplomatic agents abroad respecting such matters as parking tickets (which they are expected by the State Department to pay). Recently, however, the Department did conduct a worldwide survey of its diplomatic posts to determine what countryby-country (or, in some cases, city-by-city) variations in treatment of parking violations exist. The data from this survey is not as yet complete, but information received to date reflects a divergence in

practice from a strict requirement to satisfy such obligations to total absolution through failure to issue any citations in the first place. Question 2. Does the State Department do anything to induce diplomats to pay traffic tickets? What happens in the case of a traffic accident where the diplomat is at fault? What about actions involving property damage to property, breaches of contract or sale, etc.? Answer. Periodically, the State Department reminds embassies that members of diplomatic missions should operate their automobiles in accordance with local traffic laws and regulations, and that they are expected to pay charges resulting from parking violations. When particular problem areas are brought to our attention, we work with the embassy concerned with a view to alleviating the situation. The only sanction for not paying parking tickets is criminal prosecution, and since diplomats are immune under domestic and international law, they cannot be prosecuted. Of course, should minor traffic offenses be removed from the criminal code, then, upon repeal of the 1790 statute, subordinate members of the staff of diplomatic missions would be liable to pay civil or administrative fines for parking and other minor violations.

In traffic accidents, where diplomats are involved and the State Department is called upon for assistance, the Department urges that the parties involved first attempt to settle any claims among themselves, e.g., through their insurance companies. If a satisfactory settlement is not reached, or there is an absence of insurance coverage, the Department will, upon a written request which normally should include a police accident report and estimates of property damage or personal injury information, extend its good offices with an official communication to the embassy concerned and a request that it use its best efforts to promote a just settlement of the claim. This action frequently leads to discussions between Protocol officers and embassy officers, which may subsequently involve the participation of attorneys in efforts to bring about a compromise settlement. Also, if an impasse is reached, the Department may request an embassy to waive the individual's immunity. If immunity is waived, the matter can then be adjudicated in the courts in normal fashion. In the relatively small number of cases where it has not been possible to effect a resolution in Washington, the Department has requested that the American embassy in the diplomat's country approach the host government in the interest of a resolution.

Other cases involving property, i.e., breaches of contract, lease disputes, etc., are handled similarly.

Question 11. Who can get a diplomatic tag in Washington? in New York?

Answer. In Washington, the following persons are eligible to receive diplomatic license tags: members of the diplomatic staff of the embassies, the Delegation of the Commission of the European Communities, permanent missions to the Organization of American States, and the principal resident representatives of member States with Ambassadorial or Ministerial rank at the Washington headquarters of specialized agencies of the United Nations. Spouses of these persons and their dependent children (ages 18-26) may also

receive DPL tags. Also automobiles registered as part of the official fleet of an embassy or equivalent mission are issued such tags.

Eligible persons who reside in Maryland may register their vehicles in the District of Columbia, since Maryland does not yet issue diplomatic plates, although the State has agreed in principle to do so in the future.

In New York, diplomatic members of permanent missions to the United Nations are entitled to receive diplomatic tags on the basis of one set per family. Additional sets of DPL plates may also be obtained for the automobiles for official use for each of the 146 U.N. missions. Also, 42 top officials of the United Nations are eligible for these tags.

Question 12. Who controls the issuance of the tags in Washington? in New York?

Answer. Issuance of diplomatic license tags is controlled in Washington by the Office of the Chief of Protocol, Department of State; in New York, by the Office of Privileges and Immunities, United States Mission to the United Nations.

Question 13. How many diplomatic tags are outstanding?

Answer. There are approximately 6,000 diplomatic tags outstanding in the Washington area; approximately 1,600 in New York. Question 14. Do these tags have an expiration date?

Answer. Yes. In the District of Columbia, tags expire on March 31 of each year; in Virginia, 1 year from the date of issuance; in New York, diplomatic tags expire on a 3-year cycle, all current ones outstanding having been issued as of February 28, 1975, and falling due for renewal as of February 28, 1978, though no date appears on DPL tags issued in New York.

Question 15. Are fees charged for issuance of diplomatic tags? Answer. No fees are charged for issuance of diplomatic tags, as exemption from registration fees is one of the diplomatic privileges accorded under international practice.

Question 19. Should a fund be set up at the State Department to compensate victims of actions involving diplomats?

Answer. The State Department does not object in principle to the establishment of a fund to compensate victims of actions involving diplomats. Nevertheless, the Department has serious reservations respecting the establishment within the Department of State of a judicial or quasi-judicial apparatus for determining who is liable to whom in a dispute which should rightly be settled in a court of law. The Department hopes that repeal of the 1790 statute will result in reducing the number of disputes which are referred to the Department of State for resolution.

Question 20. What kind of laws apply to American diplomats overseas?

Answer. Under international law, diplomats have a duty to obey the laws and regulations of the receiving State. Because of their status they are, of course, accorded exemption from certain laws, such as those imposing specific types of taxes, alien registration requirements, etc. Moreover, diplomats have no immunity, in general, when traveling in third countries. American diplomats are on a par with the diplomats of other countries in these respects.

The Department is not aware of any difference in treatment imposed on U.S. diplomats by Vienna Convention party countries and non-Convention countries. The Department expects the Vienna Convention standards to be applied as a minimum.

Question 22. Have many cases arisen over the past 16 years involving American Embassy personnel abroad who have claimed immunity? What kinds of cases?

Answer. The Department records reflect very few cases arising over the past 16 years involving American Embassy personnel claiming immunity. Most cases in which immunity is an issue are those resulting from automobile accidents. In such cases the Department encourages and expects proper settlement of the dispute through insurance channels. In several instances the Department has been requested and has granted permission to an individual U.S. employee to have his immunity waived for the purpose of participating in litigation resulting from a dispute with a national of the receiving country.

Question 23. The Soviets currently lead the diplomatic corps in numbers of traffic tickets unpaid. How do the Soviets handle traffic tickets of American Embassy personnel?

Answer. The Soviets follow a practice of not issuing traffic tickets to diplomatic mission personnel posted to the U.S.S.R.

Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities, Hearings and Markup before the Subcommittee on International Operations of the Committee on International Operations of the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives, 95th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 212, 214, 216–219.

Recourse for Injured Persons

On May 17, 1977, Evan S. Dobelle, Chief of Protocol of the Department of State, testified on various legislative proposals to amend U.S. law concerning the immunities accorded resident foreign diplomatic officers, members of their families, and members of the subordinate staffs of foreign diplomatic missions. During his testimony before the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, Mr. Dobelle described the practice of the Department of State involving claims of immunity under 22 U.S.C. 252-254, which was enacted in 1790. A portion of his testimony appears below:

The Department has . . . embraced and followed a policy of monitoring claims and related legal actions involving actual or potential claims of immunity and has provided a service to all parties involved with a view towards promoting equitable settlements and preventing unwarranted claims of immunity. While the Department has had no legal authority to compel specific action in individual cases, its efforts have largely been successful in bringing parties together and eliminating immunity as a threshold impediment to appropriate resolutions. The Department can note that in at least two

cases during the past year, official requests by the Department to diplomatic missions to waive the immunity of their staff members to allow the proper operation of domestic judicial procedures have been acted upon favorably. In other cases, satisfactory solutions have been brought about through negotiations between the parties, without the necessity of formal waivers of immunity, following an expression of State Department interest relating to the immunity issue. The Department is hopeful that passage of legislation reforming immunity law will render such intervention in the future unnecessary in the large majority of cases and will facilitate the Department's efforts in cases where immunity continues to be an issue.

Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities, Hearings and Markup before the Subcommittee on International Operations of the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives, 95th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 63-64 (the "Committee Print”). Mr. Dobelle's prepared remarks begin on p. 61 of the Committee Print. A detailed description of mediation procedures of the Dept. of State and other avenues of recourse, including the possibility of declaring a diplomat persona non grata, appears in Part II of the Appendix of the Committee Print on pp. 216-218. These portions of Part II, together with a description of the cooperation expected of U.S. personnel in settling such disputes abroad, appear below:

Question 1. What kinds of mediation procedures does the State Department use to settle disputes between diplomats and American citizens? How successful have these procedures been?

Answer. Mediation procedures to settle disputes between diplomats and American citizens begin by the aggrieved citizen's filing of a written claim with supporting details with the Office of Protocol of the Department of State. In appropriate cases we use our good offices to bring the matter to the attention of the diplomat's embassy with a request that it use its best efforts to promote a just settlement of the dispute. This frequently leads to discussion between Protocol specialists and Embassy officers on specific cases. When indicated, meetings are convened in Protocol which attorneys representing both sides attend and in which both Protocol officers and an attorney from the Legal Adviser's Office participate, in efforts to bring the parties to a compromise agreement. Also where indicated if an impasse is reached, the Department may request an embassy to waive the individual's immunity. If immunity is waived, the matter can then be adjudicated in the courts in normal fashion.

As to how successful these procedures have been, no figures are available on the number of U.S. citizens who despite our efforts have been unable to obtain compensation for losses, or other satisfaction of grievances, because of diplomatic immunity. Negotiations in some exceptional instances may go on for two or three years, but usually a settlement of some sort is reached . . . .

Question 3. How often has the Department used the mechanism of persona non grata in the past 16 years? In what kind of cases?

Answer. The Department does not have any record of the number of foreign government representatives declared persona non grata [PNG] during the past 16 years. In most cases in which the persona non grata option is considered, the individual affected is normally withdrawn by the sending state prior to any formal PNG action. Also, it is noted that most cases of PNG involve matters other than abuse of privileges and immunities.

Question 6. U.S. citizens who are injured as a result of the criminal negligence of foreign diplomats have almost no avenues for redressing their grievances.