US embassy cable - 05BRATISLAVA780

C O N F I D E N T I A L  BRATISLAVA 000780 
 
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: 09/25/2010 
TAGS: KJUS, PREL, EU, LO 
SUBJECT: EXTRADITION: SLOVAKIA READY TO SUPPORT, WITH 
CONDITIONS 
 
REF: STATE 161305 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Rudolphe Vallee for reason 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
1. (C) SUMMARY: Justice Minister Daniel Lipsic told 
Ambassador during his introductory call September 26 that 
Slovakia hopes to finalize a comprehensive bilateral treaty 
on extradition during October 17-18 discussions with US 
negotiators.  In reaction to reftel talking points, Lipsic 
provided us with a MOJ proposal (see text in para 6) for 
addressing the "extradition of own nationals."  Lipsic will 
present the proposal, which provides two alternatives that 
focus on the punishments as opposed to the underlying crimes, 
to the cabinet in the next 7 to 10 days.  Post requests any 
Dept. and DOJ comments on the proposal by COB September 29 so 
that they can pass them along to the MOJ before the cabinet 
discussion.  END SUMMARY. 
 
2. (C) Ambassador, DCM and Pol/Econ deputy met with Minister 
of Justice Daniel Lipsic September 26 to discuss next steps 
on extradition and mutual legal assistance treaties per 
reftel.  The Minister was joined by his office director, 
Anton Chromik, MOJ's Head of International and European Law, 
Peter Banas, and Head of EU Affairs, Jana Vnukova.  Reftel 
talking points had been delivered to the Minister's Office on 
September 12, and discussed in a meeting with MOJ State 
Secretary Lucia Zitnanska and Jana Vnukova on September 22. 
 
SIPDIS 
Zitnanska and Vnukova conveyed that Slovakia "does not want 
to be the troublemaker" in the US-EU extradition treaty 
initiative, and that the MOJ would welcome our advisors on 
October 17 and 18.  They said they wanted to follow the lead 
of the UK (as EU President) and try to complete the 
extradition treaty by the end of the year. 
 
3. (C) Lipsic likewise expressed his desire to move forward 
expeditiously and hopes to finalize a comprehensive bilateral 
extradition treaty during the October 17-18 discussions with 
USG interlocutors.  Although he prefers a more comprehensive 
bilateral treaty, Lipsic noted that if U.S. and Slovak 
negotiators are unable to reach an agreement on a bilateral 
treaty during the October discussions, Slovakia would instead 
move forward with the implementing instruments for the US - 
EU treaties.  In either case, due to the time lag in 
preparing the treaty for Parliament and the current 
pre-election political instability, Lipsic would not expect 
Parliament to take up ratification proceedings before the end 
of their current session, though he did not rule out the 
possibility.  Elections are expected sometime between June 
and September next year, and Parliament can be in session up 
to three weeks prior to the election. 
 
4. (C) Lipsic provided the Ambassador with two alternative 
proposals (see text in para 6 below) for the "extradition of 
own nationals." These proposals are meant to replace the 
reftel proposed list of serious offenses for which nationals 
would be extradited, which Embassy presented in draft form 
(Article 3, Nationality) to the GOS with the reftel talking 
points.  Lipsic explained that the MOJ was more concerned in 
specifying the type of punishment that extradited Slovak 
nationals receive, as opposed to negotiating a list of the 
specific crimes.  He noted that the two alternatives are in 
line with the approach used in other extradition agreements 
between the US and other unspecified EU countries, and that 
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs backed these proposals. 
Alternative One would limit the maximum period of 
imprisonment for a Slovak national extradited to the U.S. to 
8 years, among other conditions.  Alternative Two does not 
limit the period of imprisonment, but allows the Minister of 
Justice in Slovakia (and his counterpart in the U.S.) to 
refuse to extradite a national under certain conditions.  He 
hopes to obtain cabinet approval for the proposals October 5 
(or October 11 at the latest)  so that his negotiators will 
have a mandate to move forward with us.  The cabinet could 
approve both or just one of the two alternatives.  Lipsic 
stated that he personally preferred Alternative Two, but 
would support either proposal. 
 
5. (C) COMMENT: Lipsic appears ready to move forward with an 
extradition treaty.  He is confident that the Cabinet will 
support his proposals, but is also realistic enough to 
recognize the difficulty in getting Parliamentary support 
during the current session.  We encourage the Dept. and DOJ 
to provide comments on the MOJ Alternatives by COB September 
29 so that we can provide feedback back to the MOJ before the 
proposals are presented to the cabinet.  Minister Lipsic 
 
 
plans to travel to the U.S. in early November for a "Rule of 
Law" symposium that is being put on by the American Bar 
Association/CEELI.  He hopes to meet with USG officials 
during his visit, which provides an opportunity for 
high-level USG follow-up to the October discussions.  END 
COMMENT. 
 
6. (SBU) BEGIN VERBATIM TEXT OF MOJ PROPOSAL: 
 
Alternatives of extradition of own nationals proposed by the 
Slovak Republic 
 
ALT 1: 
1) The requested state shall extradite an accused or 
convicted person, who is its national, under the conditions 
that there is no reason for refusal of extradition as stated 
in Articles ... and: 
a) such a person is also the national of the requesting state 
or lodged a request for the citizenship of the requesting 
state prior the offence has been committed, 
b) such a person, at the time of the commission of the 
criminal offence as defined in Article... of this Treaty, had 
a permanent residence at the territory of the requesting 
state at least for 3 years, 
c) such a person is accused or was convicted of a commitment 
of the criminal offence punishable by the laws of both 
requesting and requested states, for a maximum period of at 
least 8 years of imprisonment, or 
d) such a person has significant ties with the requesting 
state. 
2) Paragraph 1 does not apply to cases in which the capital 
punishment can be or was imposed 
 
ALT 2: 
The Contracting Parties extradite their nationals, if 
conditions of this Treaty are fulfilled.  The Minister of 
Justice of the Slovak Republic and/or ....... of the U.S. may 
refuse the extradition of the accused or convicted person, 
who is national of the requested state, in particular, if: 
a) the court decides the extradition is inadmissible, 
b) there is reasonable ground to believe that the criminal 
proceedings in the requesting state did not or would not 
comply with the principles of Articles 3 and 6 of the 
Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental 
Freedoms or that the prison sentence imposed or anticipated 
in the requesting state would not be executed in accordance 
with the requirements of Article 3 of the said Convention, 
(the conditions of Articles 3 and 6 would be defined and 
there will be no reference to the Convention itself). 
c) there is a reasonable ground to believe that the person 
whose extradition is sought would in the requesting state be 
subjected to persecution for reasons of his origin, race, 
religion, association with a particular national minority or 
class, his nationality or political opinions or that due to 
these factors his status in the criminal proceedings or in 
the enforcement of the sentence would be prejudice, or 
d) taking into account the age and personal circumstances of 
the person whose extradition is sought, he would most likely 
be inadequately severly punished by extradition in proportion 
to the level of gravity of the criminal offence he allegedly 
committed. 
 
Note: If neither of these alternatives is acceptable, the 
Slovak Republic is prepared to negotiate the single written 
instrument.  END VERBATIM TEXT. 
VALLEE 
 
 
NNNN