YOU AND THE LAWOVERSEAS

AMERICAN FORCES INFORMATION SERVICE • DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE1989

Dod GEN-37CDA Pam 360-544 (Rev. 988)NAVEDTRA 46407C*#AFP 216-1 (Rev 1988)NAVMC 2658 (Rev 1988)COMDTPUB 5800.6 (Rev. 1988)*Replaces DoD GEN 37B/DA)Pam 360-544/NAVEDTRA46407B/AFP 216-1,NAVMC 2685/COMDT PUB5600.6

#Navy Stock Number0503-LP-215-3600

The American Forces Information Servicedoes not stock copies of this publicationfor general distribution. For additional

copies, contact your command oryour service publications

distribution center.

YOU AND THE LAWOVERSEAS

AMERICAN FORCES INFORMATION SERVICE • DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE1989

2

Contents

3 Introduction 7 NATO Status of Forces Agreement 10 Criminal Jurisdiction 14 Custody of the Accused 16 Rights of the Accused 18 Other Safeguards 21 Confinement in Foreign Prisons 23 Status of U.S. Forces in Other Countries 28 Legal Status of Offices of Defense Cooperation and Military Missions 30 Status of Civilian Employees and Dependents 32 Status of Forces Agreements and Foreign Claims

3

INTRODUCTION

Overseas duty can be one of the most challenging andrewarding aspects of military service. Both the servicemember and, in the case of accompanied tours, the mili-tary family are provided with opportunities to travel, tolearn new languages, to experience new sights andsounds and to meet people of other countries and cul-tures. At the same time, U.S. forces personnel and theirfamilies get a firsthand opportunity to see how people ofother lands perceive and react to the United States andits citizens. There are also hardships and some inconveniencesassociated with a tour of duty in a foreign country. Inthe case of unaccompanied tours, the hardships of

4

separation hit both those who remain at home and thosewho leave. When a family goes overseas, there are theproblems of becoming familiar with the new surround-ings, perhaps a different language and learning how"things are done" in a different country. In most cases, the "plusses" outweigh the "minuses,"and a tour of duty in a foreign country turns out to bean enjoyable, broadening experience. As you plan and look forward to your overseas tour,there is one thing you should give particular attention toin advance, aside from all the hassle of moving yourbelongings and completing the travel. This special areaof consideration is the new relationship you will ex-perience with the law and law enforcement officials offoreign countries, both in the country to which you willbe assigned and in those you may visit on duty or leave. Most Americans in uniform and their dependents havehad few encounters with "the law" except throughtelevision and the movies, news accounts and other in-direct sources. At home, we are in one sense surroundedby laws and regulations that govern our conduct, bothcivilian and military. The difference between "right"and "wrong," between conforming to the law and breaking it,is usually quite clear. Although some people would say we have too manylaws, the fact is that most of our laws are based on ourown customs, traditions, history and current viewpointson how people should conduct themselves. Thus, in ourday-to-day lives, "the law" is nothing unusual because it

5

is built on practices and rules we are familiar with andrespect. When we do need legal guidance or if we should breakthe law, there are familiar mechanisms (which arethemselves part of the law of the land) through which wemay seek assistance or under which we are guaranteedcertain rights, protections and considerations. Perhapsnowhere else in the world is the individual as thoroughlyprotected by constitutional and other legal guaranteesas when he or she crosses paths with "the law" in theUnited States. On your overseas tour of duty, the relationships be-tween you and "the law" will undergo a significantchange. While military personnel remain subject to theUniform Code of Military Justice and to all U.S. lawsthat apply outside the country, there is a new, very im-portant element for you to understand. In a foreigncountry, depending upon the type of agreement thatexists between the host government and the United Statesgovernment, you may be subject to the laws of thatcountry. The laws in your host country more than likely devel-oped in the same way as laws in the United States—that is, based on custom, tradition, practice, necessityand experience. However, in many cases the customs andhistory are far different from those to which you are ac-customed, and so are the laws. If this is your first overseas duty and the first timeyour family has traveled or lived outside the United

6

States, it will also mark the first time you and they havecome under the jurisdiction of a foreign legal system. This booklet will provide you and your family with in-formation and guidance on how "the law" of foreigncountries and jurisdictions may affect you, how agree-ments between the United States and other governmentsdetermine when you may be subject to foreign jurisdic-tion, trial and possible imprisonment and what youshould know about these matters as they may affect youduring your on- or off-duty time. The United States has agreements with many countriesconcerning the stationing of our forces in their ter-ritories. Generally speaking, the most important of theseagreements now contain the essential protections andprivileges embodied in the NATO Status of ForcesAgreement. This booklet will concentrate on its provi-sions.

7

NATO STATUS OFFORCES AGREEMENT

When the North Atlantic Treaty Organization came in-to existence in 1949, it was apparent that military per-sonnel of one NATO country might be stationed in theterritory of another for extended periods of time. Thus, itbecame desirable to establish uniform rules for handlinglegal matters involving service members of one NATOcountry stationed in another member country. This wastrue not just for criminal cases, but also for civil claims,taxes, customs and the like. Negotiations led to the sign-ing of a NATO Status of Forces Agreement in June 1951.After considerable debate, the U.S. Senate advisedratification of the agreement in July 1953. This agreement

8

was ratified by the president during the same month. The NATO Status of Forces Agreement defines thelegal status of the armed forces of each member nationwhen stationed on the territory of another. It sets forththe rights, privileges and responsibilities of visiting forcesand of individual members of such forces, includingcivilian employees and dependents of both military andcivilian personnel. Of the 16 NATO countries, 15 subscribe to the generalprovisions of the Status of Forces Agreement: the UnitedStates, Canada, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Den-mark, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Nor-way, Portugal, Greece, Turkey, the Federal Republic ofGermany and Spain. In Iceland, the status of U.S.forces is governed by a separate agreement similar to theNATO formula. In some countries, such as Germany,Greece, the Netherlands, Turkey and Spain, there aresupplemental agreements that confer additional benefitson members of the United States forces. The laws and, indeed, the legal systems of these coun-tries vary. How these differing laws and legal systems af-fect U.S. military and civilian personnel and theirdependents concerns every American stationed overseaswith our forces. Besides conferring limited privilegesand immunities upon the members of United Statesforces, the NATO Status of Forces Agreement also ex-pressly requires them to respect the laws of the countrywhere they are assigned.

9

The agreement governs the relationship between ourarmed forces and foreign countries in matters of crim-inal jurisdiction, passport and visa regulations, taxes,claims, drivers licenses, airport regulations and other civiland legal matters. You may want to obtain clarification as to your rightsand obligations in your host country from your nearestoverseas installation legal office. Frequently, there willbe a local national attorney adviser on the staff who isthoroughly familiar with host country law as it applies toyou. Also, your legal officers will know about "U.S.country representative instructions." These specificdirectives help you help the United States fulfill its treatyobligations. For example, you will find you must reportall traffic incidents to your commander. Much of what follows will be addressed in briefings atyour new location. Take the time to become familiarwith it now, and remember to visit your base legal officeif ever you have a question about local law. You willfind highly trained attorneys ready, willing and able tohelp you.

10

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

A sovereign nation has jurisdiction, or legal authority,over most persons within its territory. However, under theNATO Status of Forces Agreement, the host countryshares jurisdiction with the visiting armed forces' countryin certain types of offenses. The key to the legal status of an American servicemember overseas with the armed forces, if he or she isaccused of a crime, is this matter of jurisdiction.Whether the accused will be tried by court-martial orstand trial in a foreign court depends upon whichcountry has "exclusive" jurisdiction or a "primary"right to exercise "concurrent" jurisdiction, the UnitedStates or the host country.

11

Under the NATO Status of Forces Agreement, theUnited States has exclusive jurisdiction over certain cate-gories of offenses. Some actions are punishable underthe Uniform Code of Military Justice and other U.S.extraterritorial laws but not under the laws of the hostcountry because the latter have not been violated. Forexample, evasion of U.S. income tax is an offense pun-ishable by U.S. law but not the law of any othercountry. Violations such as unauthorized absence,desertion or refusal to obey a lawful order are purelymilitary offenses, and U.S. military authorities have thesole right to try such cases. The host country has exclusive jurisdiction over mem-bers of our military forces in cases where the offense ispunishable by that country's laws, but not by theUniform Code of Military Justice - for example, acustoms violation. The host country also has jurisdiction over civilianemployees and dependents of military personnel orcivilian employees. U.S. Supreme Court decisions in thelate 1950s held that civilians are not subject to trial bycourt-martial during peacetime. Therefore, since UnitedStates military authorities have no effective criminaljurisdiction over civilians in peacetime, in most casestheir offenses are punishable only by the laws of the hostcountry. In all other offenses, the NATO Status of ForcesAgreement establishes a formula under which bothnations have jurisdiction. Many crimes, such as murder,

12

larceny and drunk driving, are crimes under the UniformCode of Military Justice and under the host nation's laws.Thus, jurisdiction is shared or "concurrent" with bothcountries. The NATO Status of Forces Agreementestablishes a formula for determining which country hasthe primary right to exercise jurisdiction over a particularoffense.

PRIMARY JURISDICTION

The United States has the primary jurisdiction overits military personnel in three categories of offenses:

Crimes solely against the property or security ofthe United States;

Offenses rising out of any act or omission done inthe performance of official duty;

Crimes solely against the person or property ofanother U.S. service member, a civilian employee or adependent. In all other crimes, the host country retains the pri-mary jurisdiction. If a U.S. service member, not in theperformance of official duty, commits a crime againstthe person or property of a foreign national, local au-thorities have the primary right to bring him or her totrial. Unless the host country waives its primary juris-diction, the accused will be prosecuted under the lawsand procedures of that country's criminal justice system.

13

If convicted, the service member will be punished inaccordance with the host country's laws.

WAIVER OF JURISDICTION

When an American military man or woman is accusedof a crime over which the host country has the primaryright to exercise jurisdiction, U.S. authorities may requesta waiver of jurisdiction. That is, they may ask the localauthorities to permit the U.S. authorities to exercisejurisdiction over the accused. A majority of these requestshave been granted.

14

CUSTODY OF THE ACCUSED

When a service member is arrested and accused of acrime, which nation retains custody? This depends uponthe provisions of the agreement applicable to the case. If a military member is arrested by U.S. militaryauthorities for an offense over which the United Stateshas the primary right to exercise jurisdiction, custodywill remain with the United States. If local police arrestthe military member for such an offense, they will turnthe individual over to the American authorities. If a military member is arrested by U.S. authoritiesfor an offense over which the host country has theprimary right to exercise jurisdiction, the NATO Status

15

of Forces Agreement allows the United States to retaincustody until the suspect is officially charged with aviolation of local law. If foreign police arrest a U.S. service member for anoffense over which the foreign country has the primaryright to exercise jurisdiction, they are, in most instances,permitted to retain custody. They may, as a matter ofcourtesy, surrender the service member to Americanauthorities. In Germany, a supplemental agreement to the NATOStatus of Forces Agreement grants custody to the UnitedStates until the accused is either acquitted or is convictedand begins to serve a sentence involving confinement. Atthat point, the convicted criminal will be transferred to aGerman prison. Other agreements with Greece, Portugal(for the Azores) and Spain permit the United States toretain custody until completion of all judicialproceedings.

16

RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

The NATO Status of Forces Agreement specificallyguarantees an American military member, a civilian em-ployee of the military or a dependent of either the right:

To be accorded a prompt and speedy trial; To be informed in advance of the trial of the

specific charge or charges made against him or her; To be confronted with the witnesses against him or

her; To compel the appearance of witnesses in his or

her favor; To have legal counsel of the individual's own

choice for his or her defense; To have the services of a competent interpreter; To have a U.S. government representative present

at the trial (when the rules of the court permit).

17

TRIAL OBSERVERS

When a U.S. service member, civilian employee of theU.S. armed forces or a dependent of either is tried foran offense by a foreign court in the country wherestationed, he or she is entitled to have a U.S. govern-ment representative appointed to observe the trial, wherethe rules of the court permit. This observer, usually alawyer of the armed forces, notes the manner in whichthe trial is conducted and makes a full report to theproper military authority. This observer is not a participant in the defense anddoes not become involved in the proceedings. Theobserver may, however, advise defense counsel of therights of the accused under applicable agreements. The trial observer's report is reviewed by higherauthorities to determine whether the accused was grantedall safeguards guaranteed by the applicable Status ofForces Agreement and whether he or she received a fairtrial. If a service member has been denied any guar-anteed rights or has otherwise been unfairly prosecuted,U.S. authorities will take action through military ordiplomatic channels to bring this fact to the attention ofthe host country authorities.

18

OTHER SAFEGUARDS

NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS

When it consented to ratification of the NATO Statusof Forces Agreement, the Senate passed a resolutionrequiring that Congress be notified:

Whenever a foreign country refuses to waive juris-diction in a case where it appears that the accused willnot be protected because of the absence or denial ofbasic constitutional rights he or she would enjoy in theUnited States;

If, during a trial, the accused is not granted therights spelled out in the applicable Status of ForcesAgreement.

19

PAYMENT OF EXPENSES

Congress has authorized the armed forces to pay thefollowing expenses for U.S. military personnel, membersof the civilian component and dependents tried inforeign courts:

Counsel fees (for civilian counsel); Bail; Court costs; Other related trial expenses, such as an

interpreter's fees. This authority has been used in certain important orserious cases. It has enabled accused U.S. service person-nel to hire private attorneys at government expense.Under very limited circumstances approved by the servicesecretary concerned, this authority may be used by U.S.service members, civilian employees and dependents toinitiate civil litigation in the interest of the United States.In one instance, the Army hired civilian counsel to pressthe case of a service member who challenged a Germanbusinessman for violating German law against racialdiscrimination.

FINES, DAMAGES

The United States will not pay fines or damages forwhich an individual is liable.

20

REIMBURSEMENT

Service members, civilian employees and dependentswill not be required to reimburse the United States forpayments made for counsel fees, court costs and othertrial expenses. However, should they willfully causeforfeiture of bail that has been posted for them, theywill be required to reimburse the government for theamount of the bail.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY

A U.S. military member who has been tried by aforeign court cannot be tried again by court-martial forthe same offense. However, he or she may be tried for aseparate offense against the Uniform Code of MilitaryJustice associated with the same incident. For example,if while absent without leave, a service member assaultsa local national, he or she may be tried in a local courtfor the assault and may also be tried by court-martialfor being absent without leave.

21

CONFINEMENT IN FOREIGN PRISONS

When a U.S. service member, civilian employee ordependent is confined in a foreign prison, he or she isnot abandoned by the U.S. armed forces. His or herwelfare and the protection of his or her rights continueto be the responsibility of the U.S. armed forces. U.S. officials, to the extent permitted by agreementand local law, provide our personnel confined in foreignprisons with items and services they would receive ifconfined by American forces. These include legalassistance, medical and dental care, medicine, health andcomfort items and supplemental food and clothing.

22

Service regulations require that the commandingofficer or a named representative visit U.S. servicemembers, civilian employees or dependents who areconfined in a foreign prison at least once every 30 days.Conditions of confinement and the health and welfare ofthe prisoner will be observed and reported. Chaplainsand medical officers will also visit periodically to providefor spiritual and physical needs. If permission for these visits is denied without apparentgood cause or if it appears that an individual is beingmistreated or that the conditions of confinement aresubstandard, U.S. authorities will take steps to seekcorrective action. Except in unusual cases, no member of the U.S.armed forces confined in a foreign penal institution willbe discharged or separated from the service until comple-tion of the prison term and return to the United States. Conditions in foreign prisons vary from country tocountry, just as they do in different states of the UnitedStates. Authorities who make periodic visits to prisonswhere Americans are confined make reports of theirvisits to assure that conditions are generally satisfactory.

23

STATUS OF U.S. FORCESIN OTHER COUNTRIES

Since the NATO Status of Forces Agreement was firstnegotiated in the early 1950s, the United States hassigned status of forces agreements with several othernations in which our forces are stationed. Most of themare patterned after the NATO Status of Forces Agree-ment. These agreements with non-NATO countries protectthe U.S. service member's basic rights as an Americancitizen. Variations from the NATO Status of ForcesAgreement are generally favorable to American interests.One agreement may broaden the definition of civiliancomponent. Another may provide for waiving the

24

primary right to exercise jurisdiction more readily. Athird may provide for more freely surrendering custodyof an accused American service member to U.S. militaryauthorities.

JAPAN

The status of forces agreement under Article VI of theTreaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between theUnited States and Japan contains essentially the sameprovisions as the NATO Status of Forces Agreement. Amajor difference lies in the term "visiting force." AnyU.S. service member present in Japan is considered amember of the "force." For example, a service memberstationed in Korea but on leave in Japan comes underthe agreement and is entitled to its benefits.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

The Philippine Military Bases Agreement of 1947 wasamended in 1965 and 1979 to include essentially thesame criminal jurisdiction provisions as the NATOStatus of Forces Agreement. U.S. military authorities maintain custody of accusedU.S. personnel until final judgment. At the request ofthe United States, Philippine authorities will consider thematter of waiving their primary right to exercisejurisdiction.

25

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

A status of forces agreement between the UnitedStates and the Republic of Korea went into effect in1967. It, too, is essentially patterned after the NATOagreement. Korean authorities have agreed to waive their primaryright to exercise jurisdiction over U.S. service members,except in cases "of particular importance." Anagreement has been made under which U.S. militaryauthorities are not required to request a waiver in eachcase. Instead, they inform Korean authorities of offensesover which Korea has the primary right to exercise juris-diction. If, within 15 days of this notification, Koreanauthorities do not notify U.S. military authorities thatthey intend to exercise their primary right to jurisdiction,the United States is free to exercise jurisdiction in thecase. The status of forces agreement with Korea guaranteesan accused American service member the same rightsspelled out in the NATO Status of Forces Agreement. Inaddition, other basic rights to which an accused isentitled are specified. These include:

Protection from self-incrimination; Prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment; Prohibition against prosecution for an act that was

not against the law at the time it was committed;

26

Protection against legislative acts that punish anindividual without judicial trial; Protection against double jeopardy.

Further, U.S. authorities retain custody of an Ameri-can service member being prosecuted in a Korean court.The accused remains in American custody until alljudicial proceedings, including any appeals, have beencompleted.

AUSTRALIA Our status of forces agreement in effect with Australiasince 1963 follows the pattern of the NATO Status ofForces Agreement.

PANAMA One of our most recently negotiated status of forcesagreements is the 1979 agreement with Panama, whichimplements the defense provisions of Article IV of thePanama Canal Treaty. While this agreement is similar to the basic NATOStatus of Forces Agreements, it has some distinctivedifferences. Panama has agreed to allow the UnitedStates primary jurisdiction over U.S. personnel for anycriminal offense committed within U.S. defense sites.Additionally, when Panama has primary jurisdiction andintends to prosecute a U.S. service member, the agree-ment grants the United States the right to hold the servicemember in custody until the completion of all judicialproceedings. An exception to this rule of custody applies

27

for five major criminal offenses (murder, robbery, rape,drug trafficking or crimes against the security ofPanama). Here the agreement allows Panama to retaincustody of an accused.

SPAIN

Another recent status of forces agreement is theAgreement of Defense and Economic Cooperation withSpain. Under it, the provisions of the NATO Status ofForces Agreement apply, as supplemented, in Spain. In cases where Spain has the primary right to exercisejurisdiction, the Spanish government has agreed towaiver primary jurisdiction upon request, except in casesof particular importance to it. In addition, custody of anAmerican who is being prosecuted in a Spanish court isentrusted to U.S. military authorities until the conclusionof all judicial proceedings.

PORTUGAL

The technical agreement in implementation of thedefense agreement between the United States andPortugal applies the NATO Status of Forces Agreementto U.S. bases in the Azores. Similar to the Spanishagreement, it provides more favorable criminal jurisdic-tion treatment for American service members in areas ofwaiver of primary jurisdiction to the United States andcustody.

28

LEGAL STATUS OF OFFICES OFDEFENSE COOPERATIONAND MILITARY MISSIONS

Besides having armed forces stationed in foreigncountries under treaties for mutual defense, the UnitedStates has, through separate agreements, militarymissions and offices of defense cooperation in a numberof countries. Most of these offices are small, their mainjob being to implement U.S. international securityassistance programs — in particular, foreign militarysales in that country.

29

Each of these specialized missions and offices isestablished under an agreement between the UnitedStates and the country concerned. The legal status ofOffice of Defense Cooperation and mission personnelvaries from country to country, and their criminaljurisdiction status is subject to the agreements with thecountries concerned. In general, personnel receive the diplomatic privilegesof the embassy, of which by agreement they are a part;the United States in many cases has exclusive jurisdictionover mission personnel under country agreements.Members of military missions and Office of DefenseCooperation groups should consult their commandingofficers as to their exact legal status in the country inwhich they are assigned.

30

STATUS OF CIVILIANEMPLOYEES AND DEPENDENTS

In the late 1950s, the U.S. Supreme Court held thatcivilians are not subject to trial by court-martial in peace-time. Thus, except for other U.S. extraterritoriallegislation of limited applicability (such as U.S. espionageor income tax laws), the United States cannot exercisecriminal jurisdiction over military dependents or civilianemployees and their dependents living in foreigncountries. These individuals fall under the jurisdiction ofthe host country; their offenses are punishable by thelaws of that country. However, they are entitled to theapplicable safeguards guaranteed by the various status offorces agreements.

31

If a local commander determines that suitablecorrective action under existing administrativeregulations can be taken, foreign authorities may berequested to refrain from exercising their jurisdiction. If such a request is denied and it further appearspossible that the accused may not obtain a fair trial, theUnited States will seek to resolve the matter throughdiplomatic channels. Service regulations direct military commanders toassist civilian employees and dependents in the custodyof foreign authorities or confined in foreign penalinstitutions. In cooperation with diplomatic authorities,commanders will, insofar as possible, assure that suchcivilians receive the same treatment, rights and supportas military personnel.

32

STATUS OF FORCES AGREEMENTSAND FOREIGN CLAIMS

When large numbers of Americans are stationed in aforeign country, incidents inevitably arise that result incivil claims against the U.S. military forces. Effectiveand timely settlement of claims does much to maintaingood international relations and to resolve outstandingcriminal charges. It also makes the presence of Americanmilitary forces more acceptable to the people of aforeign nation. To avoid friction, provisions are made in the status offorces agreements for the prompt settlement of claimsarising out of the activities of our armed forces.

33

U.S. service regulations authorize the administrativesettlement of meritorious claims that are caused by amember or civilian employee of U.S. forces or thatresult from non-combat activities of those forces. U.S.military authorities administer the entire foreign claimsprogram so as to take full advantage of its favorableimpact on the foreign relations of the United States. Under the NATO Status of Forces Agreement, aforeign national's claim against a U.S. service memberacting in an official capacity is processed by the hostcountry. The host country determines whether the claimis to be paid and the amount to be paid. The hostcountry pays the claimant and then seeks reimbursementfrom the United States for 75 percent of the amountpaid. The agreement provides that the host country willpay 25 percent of the cost of settlement. When a claim against the United States forces arisesout of an act not done in the performance of officialduty, the host country investigates the claim. Its recom-mendation about settlement is forwarded to U.S.authorities, who will consider whether payment should bemade. If the United States elects to pay the claim, it bearsthe entire cost of payment. The service member involvedis not required to reimburse the U.S. government butmay be subject to some form of legal or administrativeaction, depending upon the circumstances involved. On the other hand, a U.S. service member may besued as an individual for damages, and a foreign courtmay hand down a judgment against him or her, where

34

the act or omission was not done in the performance ofofficial duty. In such a case, payment of damages is thefull responsibility of the individual service member,unless the United States has already made a paymentthat has been accepted by the claimant in full settlementof the claim. If a civil suit for damages is brought against an indi-vidual U.S. service member for an act done in theperformance of official duty, he or she should report thefact immediately to the commander of the installation aswell as to the command judge advocate.

ADDITIONAL PRIVILEGES AND OBLIGATIONS

The NATO Status of Forces Agreement containsseveral additional privileges and obligations for U.S.personnel stationed in a country party to the agreement.Similar privileges and obligations frequently apply inother countries where U.S. forces are stationed.

THESE PRIVILEGES INCLUDE:

Exemption from foreign taxes on their tangiblepersonal property and on salaries paid them by the U.S.government;

The right to import, free of duty, furniture andpersonal effects at the time of their first arrival for duty

35

or at the time of the first arrival of their dependents tojoin them. They may also import, free of duty, auto-mobiles for their personal use and that of theirdependents;

Host country acceptance, without additional fee ortest, of military driving permits and drivers licensesissued to military personnel by any U.S. state or theDistrict of Columbia;

Exemption of members of the armed forces frompassport and visa regulations. This does not apply tocivilians or dependents.

THESE OBLIGATIONS INCLUDE:

Obtaining permission of host country authorities tosell locally any item imported duty-free into the country;

Compliance with foreign exchange regulations; The duty to respect the laws of the host country.

SOME POINTS TO BEAR IN MIND

A sovereign nation has the right to exercise jurisdic-tion over persons in its territory. All persons in acountry - including military personnel - unless granteddiplomatic or other legal immunity, are subject to thatcountry's laws. A status of forces agreement defines the legal status of

36

the armed forces of one nation when stationed in theterritory of another. Under a status of forces agreement, the host countryshares jurisdiction over military personnel of a "visitingforce." The host country has jurisdiction, as a general rule,over civilian employees and dependents of military orcivilian personnel. The United States will pay the trial expenses for aU.S. service member, civilian employee or dependentbeing tried for a crime by a foreign court. If an American service member, civilian employee ordependent is confined in a foreign penal institution, theUnited States will seek to assure treatment andprotections similar to those accorded personnel confinedin U.S. military facilities. A U.S. military member or civilian employee can besued in the civil courts of a foreign nation and be liablefor damages for his or her non-duty acts. Dependentsmay also be sued in foreign civil courts. All Americans abroad have the duty to respect thelaws of the nations they visit and in which they arestationed.

The Secretary of DefenseWashington

November 1988

YOU AND THE LAWOVERSEAS(DOD GEN-37C)

This official Department ofDefense publication is forthe use of personnel in the

military services.