US embassy cable - 05BRATISLAVA440

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRATISLAVA 000440 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
STATE FOR L/LEI- K. PROPP, EUR/NCE AND EUR/ERA 
PARIS FOR DOJ - K. HARRIS 
USEU FOR M. RICHARD 
VIENNA FOR DHS/ICE - D. MRKVA 
DOJ FOR OIA - D. GAYNUS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/06/2015 
TAGS: PREL, KJUS, EU, LO 
SUBJECT: POLITICAL AND PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES MOVING 
FORWARD ON EXTRADITION 
 
REF: A. PROPP-HEVIA EMAIL 19 APR 2005 
     B. BRATISLAVA 296 
 
Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Scott N. Thayer for reasons 1.5 (b) an 
d (d). 
 
 1. (C) After the U.S. negotiating team and Slovak Ministry 
of Justice Director for Judicial Cooperation in Criminal 
Matters Branislav Bohacik failed to reach agreement April 14 
on pursuing bilateral extradition and mutual legal assistance 
treaties (or on signing instruments to implement US-EU 
treaties--Ref A), Pol-Econ Chief attempted to meet with 
Bohacik for a readout.  In a May 4 e-mail he wrote, "I can 
confirm that we did not reach any agreement with your 
colleagues.  They also suggested to communicate directly in 
order to avoid any misunderstanding...We took into 
consideration that there is no interest on your side to 
conclude full bilateral agreements.  Our policy is a 
different one; we still prefer to have full treaties.  The 
issue is still under consideration within interested 
authorities."  Since then, it has been impossible to get on 
Bohacik's calendar. 
 
2. (C) While the issue is "still under consideration," it may 
be contributing to a lack of will to cooperate on judicial 
matters.  In response to the requests for provisional arrests 
for extradition of Slovak nationals we delivered April 12 
(ref B), the Deputy Head of the International Department of 
the General Prosecutor's office wrote to DHS/ICE Vienna, 
"Regarding the fact that internal legal regulations admit the 
extradition of Slovak citizens only if a promulgated 
international treaty so stipulates, the extradition of the 
named persons is out of question...Seizure of property is 
impossible.  The legal regulations of the Slovak Republic 
require the existence of an international contractual 
(treaty) basis to which both countries are bound in the event 
of interference with property rights.  Since we did not 
identify such an international treaty, the seizure of 
property seems to us impossible to execute...I very much 
regret to have to state that we did not succeed in 
identifying a legal basis on which we could execute the legal 
acts you have requested."  We have also detected an 
unwillingness to engage in more informal investigative 
cooperation, which we are trying to overcome. 
 
3. (C) Comment: It is only speculation that there is a 
connection between failed talks in Brussels and the assertion 
by the Slovak General Prosecutor's Office that there is no 
international legal agreement upon which they can base 
cooperation.  The General Prosecutor's office is independent 
and not under the control of the Ministry of Justice. 
Nonetheless, Bohacik's inference that he has been advised by 
DOJ not to talk with the Embassy hinders our ability to probe 
further on next steps for extradition and/or mutual legal 
assistance treaties, or for the MOJ's read on these specific 
cases. 
 
4. (C) Post would appreciate an update on treaty discussions 
with the Slovaks, before attempting again to meet with 
Bohacik. 
THAYER 
 
 
NNNN