Legal Analyses written by Mike Meier, Attorney at Law. Copyright 2017 Mike Meier. www.internationallawinfo.com.

Legal Analyses written by Mike Meier, Attorney at Law. Copyright 2017 Mike Meier. www.internationallawinfo.com.

1996 International Law Update, Volume 2, Number 5 (May).

ALIEN TORT CLAIMS

Under Alien Tort Claims Act, New York district court grants default judgment against Rwandan leaders allegedly involved in massacre of Rwandan Tutsi minority

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has granted a motion for a $105,000,000 default judgment against Jean Bosco Barayagwiza, one of the Rwandan political leaders accused of having played an instrumental role in the 1994 massacre of Rwanda's Tutsi minority. Barayagwiza was a leader of the Rwandan Hutu political party, the Coalition pour la Défense de la Republique (CDR). The plaintiffs were relatives of massacre victims who sought compensation under the Alien Tort Claims Act [28 U.S.C. § 1350] (ATCA), the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 [Pub.L. No. 102-256, 106 Stat. 73 (1992)] (TVPA), and the Rwandan Civil Code.

Relying on Kadic v. Karadzic, 70 F.3d 232 (2nd Cir. 1995) [see 1995 Int'l L. Update 5 (December)], the Court rules that it has jurisdiction under the ATCA "whether or not [the act was] committed by a state." Here, the affidavits establish that the defendant's actions were part of a coordinated, genocidal effort along with Rwandan government officials. Thus, defendant acted under color of law.

The defendant's conduct is also actionable under the TVPA. The Court relieves the plaintiffs of the statutory requirement of exhaustion of remedies in the country where the offense had occurred, because the Rwandan judicial system is virtually inoperative and will be unable to deal with civilian claims in the near future.

The Court also notes that the defendant had contested jurisdiction because he was served while attending a session of the United Nations.  The Second Circuit, however, rejected a similar argument in Kadic. Furthermore, with a diplomatic note, the "current Rwandan government" waived any claim of immunity that the defendant might assert. [The Court does not explain who the current "Rwandan government" is - The Editors].

Citation: Mushikiwabo v. Barayagwiza, No. 94 Civ. 3627 (S.D.N.Y. April 9, 1996).

AVIATION

D.C. Circuit holds air carriers not responsible for detention costs of persons in transit without visas and stowaways who seek asylum in U.S.

Based on sections 233 (repealed in 1986), 237 and 238 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) [8 U.S.C. § 1233 (1970)], Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) policies require air carriers to pay the detention expenses for airline passengers who claim asylum in the United States during stopovers.

Under the INS "Transit without Visa" (TWOV) policy, foreign passengers may board planes bound for the U.S. to connect to a flight to some other country even if they do not have U.S. visas. Those passengers remain in special airport areas until the continuing flight departs.

These passengers, however, sometimes seek asylum in the U.S. during such stopovers. The INS made the airline responsible for all expenses associated with such asylum claims, such as hotel rooms, security guards, meals, and medical expenses.

When the Air Transport Association of America (ATA) challenged the INS policies in federal court, the court found that the INA authorized INS's policies and ATA appealed.

The D.C. Circuit disagrees. In its view, the INS's policies of requiring carriers to bear the detention costs of TWOVs and stowaways lack any basis in law. Carriers cannot be required, by regulation, contract, or otherwise, to bear detention expenses during pendency of the asylum applications. The ATA, however, lacks standing to request compensation for the amounts that ATA members have already paid.

Citation: Air Transport Association of America v. Reno, No. 95-5143 (D.C. Cir. March 26, 1996). [For similar holding in Second Circuit, see 1995 International Law Update 4 (November)].

U.S. Department of Transportation updates rule allowing airlines to electronically file international tariff rules governing availability of passenger fares and conditions of service

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has permitted electronic filing of international passenger fares since 1989. DOT, however, has recently issued an updated rule to allow the electronic filing of tariff rules governing the availability of passenger fares and their conditions of service [14 C.F.R. 221]. The format requirements are minimal.

DOT estimates that the rule will save the airline industry more than $1,000,000 by reducing the requirements for the submission of international tariffs.

Citation:  61 Fed. Reg. 18070 (April 24, 1996) [For further information, contact the Department's Office of International Aviation at (202) 366-2435].

CHOICE OF LAW

In firm's suit against Irish heirs to collect one-third of inheritances for firm's aid in New Jersey estate litigation, Irish Supreme Court finds "heir-locator" contract with contingent fee provision unenforceable

In 1987, the U.S. agents of a London firm of "heir-locators" reported that the New Jersey courts were administering the estate of one Evelyn Herbert who had apparently died without a will and without next-of-kin. After the firm located three Irish citizens entitled to the estate, it entered into an agreement with them whereby the firm would disclose the name of the deceased in return for one-third of any sum recovered on behalf of the Irish heirs. The contract had a clause choosing English law as the proper law of the contract admittedly because the New Jersey attorney-general took the position that such arrangements were illegal.

As a result of the firm's expenditures and efforts to prepare for the proceeding in the New Jersey courts, the heirs recovered a total of $763,758 from the estate. The heirs, however, declined to turn over one-third to the firm. In the firm's suit in an Irish court, the heirs argued that the firm was entitled only to fees on a quantum meruit basis because the contract was champertous and thus unenforceable. The trial judge ruled for the heirs.

The Irish Supreme Court affirms. The Court first determines that English law is the proper law of the contract and then examines the public policy issue as to champerty. It concludes that English law has long condemned heir-locator contracts as champertous. The Court notes that, unlike most nations, U.S. law has given qualified approval to contingent fee arrangements for attorneys. Nevertheless, many states, including New Jersey, still regard heir-locator agreements as contrary to public policy and thus unenforceable.

As to Irish public policy, the Court concludes that it agrees with the English view. The essential difficulty lies not so much in the supplying of information on a contingent fee basis but in the gathering of evidence and other activity in aid of litigation on behalf of the heirs. Nor does it matter, as the firm argued, that the disfavored activity took place in New Jersey and not in Ireland itself.

Citation: Fraser v. Buckle, Case No. 321/93 (Ir. Sup. Ct., 5 March 1996).

BANKING

U.S. Department of Treasury revises regulations on international operations of U.S. and foreign banks

As part of the Regulation Review Program of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the U.S. Treasury Department has streamlined its provisions regarding international banking operations of U.S. and foreign banks through Federal branches and agencies of the U.S. [see 12 C.F.R. Parts 5, 20, 28].

The new rule consolidates into a single comprehensive regulation the substantive requirements for international banking operations supervised by the OCC. The rule relocates and incorporates the current subpart B of Part 20 regarding international lending supervision, which will become subpart C of Part 28. The procedural requirements of 12 C.F.R. Part 5 continue to apply to Federal branches and agencies, unless otherwise provided.

The effective date is July 1, 1996.

Citation: 61 Federal Register 19524 (May 2, 1996).

CRIMINAL LAW

First Circuit holds that U.S. wire fraud statute does not encompass scheme to defraud foreign government of customs and tax revenues

Francis Boots and several others took part in a scheme to ship tobacco from a Native American reservation in upstate New York (Akwasasne) into New Brunswick, Canada, without paying the taxes and excise duties imposed by Canadian laws.

A district court convicted them of, among other crimes, devising a scheme or artifice using the wires in interstate commerce with intent to defraud Canada and the Province of Nova Scotia of excise duties and tax revenues in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 [wire fraud statute]. They appealed, arguing that the statute does not extend to a scheme to defraud foreign governments.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reverses. The fact that the object of the scheme was to defraud a foreign government pushes it beyond the parameters of the frauds cognizable under the wire fraud statute. Even though federal wire fraud prosecutions have rested on frauds against foreign private businesses and individuals, a court must consider constitutional and prudential aspects if a foreign government is the victim.

"Foreign customs and tax frauds are intertwined with enforcement of a foreign sovereign's own laws and policies to raise and collect such revenues... [O]ur courts have traditionally been reluctant to enforce foreign revenue laws ["the revenue rule"] ... Although this case does not require us to enforce a foreign tax judgment as such, upholding defendants' section 1343 conviction would amount functionally to penal enforcement of Canadian customs and tax laws. The scheme to defraud at issue ... had as its sole object the violation of Canadian revenue laws." [15-16]

Citation: United States v. Boots, No. 94-1811 (1st Cir. March 29, 1996).

ENVIRONMENT

U.S. State Department issues rules for determining comparability of foreign and U.S. programs for turtle protection in the course of trawling for shrimp

The U.S. Department of State has issued guidelines for determining whether foreign countries have programs for turtle protection in shrimp trawl fishing that are comparable to the U.S. Program. The following species of sea turtles are protected: green, hawksbill, Kemp's ridley, leatherback, and loggerhead.

Under Section 609 of the Endangered Species Act amendment (Pub.Law 101-162), no one may import shrimp harvested with technology that may adversely affect protected sea turtles unless there is an annual certification to Congress (1) that the foreign country has a regulatory program and an incidental take rate that is similar to that of the U.S., or (2) that the foreign country does not pose a threat of incidental taking of sea turtles.

The State Department has revised the previous guidelines in accordance with an order of the U.S. Court of International Trade in the case of Earth Island Institute v. Christopher, 913 F.Supp. 559 (Ct. Int'l. Trade 1995). In that case, the Court held that Section 609 applies to wild shrimp harvested in all foreign countries, not just in the wider Caribbean region. On April 10, the Court refused to grant a stay. Therefore, the government has until May 1 to bar the importation of wild shrimp from countries that are not adequately protecting sea turtles.

Starting May 1, an exporter must accompany the exports of shrimp with an attestation that fisherman harvested the shrimp under conditions that did not adversely affect sea turtles, or in waters of a country that has a "comparable" program. On the other hand, the Section 609 import prohibitions will not apply to shrimp or shrimp products that are harvested (1) in aquaculture facilities, (2) with fishing equipment that would not require "turtle excluder devices" (TEDs) under the U.S. program, or (3) in areas where there are no sea turtles.

Citation: 61 Federal Register 17342 (April 19, 1996).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency publishes final rule listing substances that are subject to Basel Convention on transboundary movements of hazardous wastes

The Basel Convention on the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and other waste [28 I.L.M. 657 (1989)] seeks to restrict uncontrolled transfers and dumping of hazardous materials. The Convention established procedures for controlling imports, exports and transit of such wastes. It itemizes the various types of waste in red, amber and green lists.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has published a final rule that, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), identifies the wastes that are subject to the Basel Convention. This rule will apply only to U.S. exporters and importers of RCRA hazardous wastes destined for "recovery" in OECD countries (except Canada and Mexico, where bilateral agreements and regulations govern waste transfer).

The new rule enters into force on July 11, 1996.

Citation: 61 Federal Register 16290 (April 12, 1996). [Additional material is available on the internet: http://www.epa.gov].

Note on the ability of EU member states to have environmental requirements that are stricter than EU requirements

Environmental restrictions in EU Member States that differ from EU requirements affect U.S. exporters whose products must comply to be distributed freely. Under Articles 100a(4) and 130t of the EC Treaty, the EU Member States may have "more stringent" environmental requirements that are compatible with the Treaty.  The scope of this provision is far from clear, but recently the EU's position has been clarified in two decisions regarding the hazardous chemical substance Pentachlorophenol (PCP). PCP is a common industrial chemical substance used in the leather industry, wood preservation, textile treatment, as well as the pulp and paper industry.

The basic EC directive on PCP (Directive 91/173/EEC) generally prohibits the marketing and use of PCP and its salts and esters in a concentration equal to or greater than 0.1% by mass in substances and preparations. Compared to the Directive, the German permissible limit value is so low that it virtually prohibits the use of PCP. The Commission had endorsed the German restriction in 1992, but the European Court of Justice annulled that endorse­ment for the Commission's failure to provide a statement of reasons.

In December 1996, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion that it does not consider the German restriction a trade barrier. In March 1996, the Commission issued a similar decision regarding Denmark. The EC Commission accepted the Danish justification that such restrictions are necessary to protect human health, especially in light of present PCP pollution in Denmark.

Citation: Commission Decision of 14 September 1994 concerning the prohibition of PCP notified by the Federal Republic of Germany, 1994 Official Journal of the European Communities (O.J.) (L 316) 43, 9 December 1994; Commission Decision of 26 February 1996 concerning the prohibition of pentachlorophenol (PCP) notified by Denmark, 1996 O.J. (L 68) 32, 19 March 1996  [The European Union adopts (a) directives, which the member states must enact into national law before they become effective, (b) regulations, which are directly applicable in all member states, and (c) decisions, which are directly applicable to the persons to whom they are addressed, including member states, legal persons, and individuals - The Editors].

EXTRADITION

On jurisdictional grounds, the D.C. Circuit sets aside lower court ruling enjoining federal extradition statutes as unconstitutional

Canada had sought the extradition of Anthony LoBue and Thomas Kulekowski and they sued the Secretary of State in federal court. The district court granted the plaintiffs' motion to enjoin their extradition to Canada, holding that the extradition statutes [18 U.S.C. §§ 3184, 3186] were unconstitutional. In the court's view, the grant of plenary discretion to the Secretary to decline to surrender a fugitive after the courts have found him extraditable violates separation of powers principles. [See 1995 Int'l L. Update 4 (October); 3 (November)].

On the government's appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reverses and orders dismissal of the case for lack of jurisdiction. The availability of a habeas corpus remedy in the district of confinement ousts the lower court of jurisdiction over a fugitive's declaratory judgment action to challenge the constitutionality of the extradition.

In addition, plaintiffs have filed a petition for habeas corpus in the Northern District of Illinois where they are in federal custody.

Citation: LoBue v. Christopher, No. 95-5293 (D.C. Cir. April 30, 1996).

Supreme Court of Canada rejects claim of Canadian citizen that extraditing him to United States to face drug charges with mandatory minimum sentences of 10 and 20 years would violate his fundamental rights under Canadian Charter

Lee Michael Whitley, a Canadian citizen, was the kingpin of an organized effort to transport 1,100 pounds of marijuana from Texas into Canada. After Canadian authorities had arrested Whitley and filed Canadian drug charges against him, the U.S. requested his extradition pursuant to the Canada-U.S. Extradition Treaty. Noting that the U.S. had prosecuted Whitley's alleged coconspirators and that most of the evidence was located there, Canadian officials were satisfied with the showing made by the U.S. and ordered Whitley surrendered to the U.S. for trial. Whitley sought judicial review.

Among several grounds, Whitley pointed out that the two U.S. charges involved minimum sentences of 10 and 20 years respectively without possibility of parole for conducting a continuing criminal enterprise. As applied outside the realm of "hard drugs," Whitley maintained, such mandatory minimum sentences shocked the Canadian conscience and would violate his right to fundamental justice under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, however, rejected Whitley's challenge. It pointed out that the issue was not whether such a sentencing scheme was constitutional or even desirable within Canada but whether surrendering Whitley to the possibility of such sentences in the United States would shock the conscience. The Court noted that Whitley was not a first offender dealing in a minimal amount of unlawful drugs, but one who had organized a large and sophisticated conspiratorial enterprise involving the carriage of large quantities of marijuana over long distances.

Moreover, Whitley had an extensive criminal record in drug trafficking and stood to profit greatly from his illegal business. Under such circumstances, the Court noted, the criminal justice system of almost any country would mete out a stiff sentence.

Upon review by the Supreme Court of Canada, that Court affirms the dismissal of Whitley's challenge to his extradition to the United States, adopting the rationale of the Court of Appeal.

Citation: United States v. Whitley, 119 D.L.R. 4th 693 (Ont.Ct.App. 1994), affirmed, 194 C.C.C.3d 447 (Sup.Ct. March 19, 1996).

FORUM NON CONVENIENS

Second Circuit affirms dismissal of U.S. copyright infringement action based on forum non conveniens, rejecting plaintiff's contention that lack of contingency fees in alternative forum makes it "unavailable" to him

Dominic Murray is a self-employed designer and manufacturer of costumes and props in London, England. The BBC hired Murray to produce the costume of "Mr. Blobby" for BBC TV host Noel Edmonds. Since the Mr. Blobby costume became quite popular, BBC began licensing Mr. Blobby products in the United Kingdom in 1993. Murray allegedly consulted a lawyer, but did not pursue a claim because of the high costs. In 1994, BBC presented Mr. Blobby in New York at the International Licensing and Merchandising Conference and Exposition. Murray then obtained American counsel, and sued the B.B.C. in federal court for copyright infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition. The district court dismissed the action on forum non conveniens grounds, deeming the UK the appropriate forum.

Murray appealed, arguing that the judge should not have dismissed the case because a contingent fee arrangement would not be available to him to secure counsel in the UK. Noting that both the U.S. and the UK are parties to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works [25 U.S.T. 1341, T.I.A.S. No. 7868, 828 U.N.T.S. 221], Murray also claimed that a U.S. court had to give his choice of forum the same deference that a domestic plaintiff gets.

The Second Circuit, however, affirms the dismissal. Under Article V of the Berne Convention, "the extent of protection, as well as the means of redress afforded to the author to protect his rights, shall be governed exclusively by the laws of the country where protection is claimed."  The Court also points out that the Convention contains no explicit guarantee of equal access to courts. The principle of "national treatment" in the Berne Convention does not alone mandate that American courts provide foreign plaintiffs with the same procedural opportunities as those accorded American plaintiffs alleging copyright infringement.

The Court also rejects Murray's argument that his lack of resources renders the English forum unavailable in practical effect. "The majority of courts deem a plaintiff's financial hardships resulting from the absence of contingent fee arrangements to be only one factor to be weighed in determining the balance of convenience after the court determines that an alternative forum is available. ... We agree with the majority rule. Balancing the plaintiff's financial burdens as one of several relevant factors serves the 'repeatedly emphasized ... need to retain flexibility' in the application of the forum non conveniens doctrine." [3169-3170] In this case, the UK is the more appropriate forum.

Citation:  Murray v. British Broadcasting Corp., No. 95-7458 (2nd Cir., April 10, 1996). [The U.S. ratified the Berne Convention on October 31, 1988. The Convention entered into force on March 1, 1989, based on the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, Pub.L. No. 100‑568, 102 Stat. 2853 (codified in various sections of Title 17)].

TRADE

Appellate Body of WTO generally affirms Dispute Settlement Panel's ruling adverse to United States on discriminatory effects of EPA's "Gasoline Rule" but recognizes Rule's goal of conserving clean air

The April issue of the Update [at page 46] reported extensively on a proceeding that Brazil and Venezuela had brought against the U.S. before a GATT dispute settlement panel.

On January 17, 1996, the panel ruled that the EPA's "Gasoline Rule" discriminated against foreign producers and importers of gasoline.

The U.S. appealed on February 21, 1996 to the Appellate Body of the WTO. In April, that Body handed down its first ruling. It substantially affirms the panel's report in its recommendation that EPA bring its Rule into conformity with GATT requirements or face the possibility of trade sanctions.

The WTO Body, however, does disagree with one of the panel's findings. The panel had rejected the American argument that its measures were necessary under Article XX(g), the conservation section, because they aimed at conservation of an exhaustible natural resource, clean air. The WTO Appellate Body gave credence to this argument. It recognized that the Rule was a measure designed to preserve clean air in combination with domestic conservation programs.

Citation: 13 International Trade Reporter 703 (BNA, May 1, 1996).

U.S. President signs bill to tighten embargo against Cuba and to authorize private suits to recover damages against those dealing in property seized from U.S. plaintiffs

On March 12, 1996, two days after Cuban jet fighters shot down two U.S. civilian aircraft, President Clinton signed into law the "Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996" (LIBERTAD). The principal sponsors of the bill were Senator Jesse Helms and Representative Dan Burton. Among other things, the Act provides for:

Continuance of the existing embargo against Cuba (§ 102);

A ban on U.S. nationals, resident aliens, and agencies from providing loans, credit, or other financing for transactions that involve confiscated property claimed by a U.S. national (§ 103);

The filing of damage suits against those who traffick in confiscated property (§ 302); such suits must involve an amount in controversy of more than $50,000;

Rejection by U.S. courts of the Act of State doctrine in determining the merits of the case;

The denial of entry into the U.S. of anyone who trafficks in property seized by the Cuban government on or after January 1, 1959, or who is a corporate officer, principal, or shareholder of an entity that has been involved in confiscated property.

Under the Act, the U.S. may suspend the embargo once the Cubans have set up a "transition government" if the President and Congress agree that suspension wold contribute to a "stable foundation for a democratically elected government." (§ 204)

Citation: H.R. 927, Pub. Law 104-114 (March 12, 1996) [For legislative history see, H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 468, 104th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1996; 1996 U.S.C.C.A.N. 558].

EC issues new Integrated Tariff of the European Communities (TARIC) and explanatory memorandum

The EC Commission has published an explanatory memorandum on the Integrated Tariff of the EC (TARIC), that was established by Regulation 2658/87 [tariffs].

TARIC is designed to show the various rules applying to specific products when imported into the customs territory of the EC or, in some cases, when exported from it. It incorporates the provisions of:

 The harmonized system,

 The combined nomenclature (CN), and

 Specific EC rules.

TARIC is based on the CN which has about 15,000 headings (8-digit codes) and serves as the basic nomenclature for the Common Customs Tariffs. It contains about 20,000 additional subdivisions (coded with two extra digits, or an additional code), needed for tariff suspensions, tariff quotas, countervailing charges, export restrictions, and so forth.

The EC publishes TARIC separately in four volumes (issue C 98A). You may order it from the EC publications office (phone in Luxembourg: (352) 499-28-1; FAX: (352) 495-71-9) or from sales agents for EC publications.

Citation: Integrated tariff of the European Communities (Taric), 1996 Official Journal of the European Communities (C 98) & (C 98A) 1, 1 April 1996.

U.S. Treasury issues rules on disclosure of customs information in legal proceedings

Many customs records are confidential business information subject to the Trade Secrets Act [18 U.S.C. § 1905], which prohibits the disclosure of such information by an officer or employee of the U.S.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury issued a final rule regarding the procedures for disclosing customs information (documents, information, employee testimony) in U.S. and foreign legal proceedings [see 19 C.F.R. Part 103]. The rules apply to current and former customs employees, as well as litigants who seek to compel customs employees to disclose or produce customs information. The Office of the Chief Counsel will make determinations concerning the disclosure of such information.

The new rules enter into force on June 3, 1996.

Citation: 61 Federal Register 19835 (May 3, 1996).

U.S. no longer bars sales of military goods and services to Russia

Based on President Clinton's policy that U.S. laws and regulations should be updated to reflect the end of the Cold War, the U.S. Department of State has issued a final rule to amend the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) [22 C.F.R. 126], because it is no longer the policy of the U.S. to deny licenses, approvals, and exports/imports of defense articles and related services to the Russian Federation.

"Russia" has been removed from the list of restricted countries. All requests in this area will be reviewed by the State Department on a case-by-case basis.

The effective date is April 3, 1996.

Citation: 61 Federal Register 19841 (May 3, 1996).

SECURITIES

Federal Reserve Board of Governors publishes list of foreign margin stocks

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System publishes four times a year the following items:

 List of Marginable Over-the-Counter Stocks (OTC List), which includes the stocks traded over-the-counter in the U.S. that are subject to the margin requirements of Federal Reserve Regulations, and the

 List of Foreign Margin Stocks (Foreign List), which includes foreign equity securities that meet the eligibility criteria of Section 220.17 of Regulation T and are eligible for margin treatment at broker-dealers on the same basis as domestic margin securities.

The Board has published the additions and deletions from the previous lists. It published the latest Foreign List on January 29, 1996. A copy of the complete list is available from the Federal Reserve Banks.

Citation:  61 Federal Register 18495 (April 26, 1996).

U.S. to leave UNIDO: On December 4, 1995, the United States cancelled its membership of the UN Organization for Industrial Development (UNIDO). UNIDO promotes the industrialization of developing countries by providing technical assistance, training, and advisory services. The Charter of the organization will cease to apply to the U.S. on December 31, 1996. Citation: 1996 [German] Bundesgesetzblatt II, number 13, page 367, 2 April 1996.

France and the U.S. conclude tax treaty: On August 31, 1994, France and the United States concluded an agreement on the avoidance of double taxation and to avoid fraud in tax matters. As for France, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs are the competent authorities for purposes of this agreement. The agreement entered into force on 30 December 1995. The French government published the agreement in the Journal Officiel.  Citation: 1996 Journal Officiel de la Republique Française, page 4415, 22 March 1996.

F.C.C. streamlines international authorization process:  The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has issued a final rule to streamline the international Section 214 authorization process.

Section 214 of the Communications Act provides: "No carrier shall undertake the construction of a new line or of an extension of

any line, or shall acquire or operate any line, or extension thereof, or shall engage in transmission over or by means of such additional or extended line, unless and until there shall first have been obtained from the Commission a certificate that the present or future public convenience and necessity require or will require the construction, or operation, or construction and operation, of such additional or extended line ..." 47 U.S.C. § 214(a)(1988).

The purpose of the new rule is to eliminate outdated administrative obligations on carriers and to encourage more applicants to enter the international market.  The rule enters into force on May 9, 1996, or upon approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Citation: 61 Federal Register 15724 (April 9, 1996).

Amendments to Bank Secrecy Act regulations will enhance recordkeeping of international transactions: The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve have jointly adopted amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act regulations [31 C.F.R. Part 103]. The purpose is to enhance recordkeeping of certain international fund transfers. Citation: 61 Federal Register 14383, 14386 (April 1, 1996).

EU imposes anti-dumping duties on U.S. and others:  The EU has issued a regulation to impose a definitive anti-dumping duty on 3.5" computer microdisks originating in Malaysia, Mexico and the United States. The duty imposed on U.S. products is 44% (TARIC additional code 8857), except for products of 3M, TDK and Verbatim (TARIC additional code 8853).  Citation:  1996 Official Journal of the European Communities (L 92) 3, 13 April 1996.

State Department publishes complete list of independent states:  The U.S. Department of State published a useful list of the world's 190 independent states (including short and long name, and name of capital). The list includes Taiwan, as well as 63 dependencies and areas of special sovereignty (including short and long name, name of the controlling sovereign, and the name of the capital).  Citation: 1996 U.S. Department of State Dispatch, Vol. 7, No. 9, page 70 (February 26, 1996) [The lists are also available on the Internet: http://www.state.gov, Gopher: dosfan.lib.uic.edu; as well as by calling the Department's Fax-on-Demand system at (202) 736-7720].

Chinese Government issues statements on Religion in China:  The Chinese Embassy in Washington, DC, has published statements on Chinese Religion and Religious Policy. The statement briefly describes the representation of the main religions, such as Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism and other forms of Christianity.

According to the statements, China protects the right to freedom of religious belief, including that of foreigners residing in China. The regulation of religion largely rests on two 1994 regulations of the State Council (Nos. 144 and 145). The Chinese Embassy subsequently published the remarks of the Director of the State Council's Religious Affairs Bureau to a European Union Human Rights Delegation.  Citation: Newsletter of the People's Republic of China, No. 7 (April 15, 1996) & No. 8 (May 1, 1996).

Copyright restoration under Uruguay Round: Under GATT and the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) [Pub.Law No. 103-465; 108 Stat. 4809 (1994)], the copyrights for certain works that were in the public domain in the U.S. for failure to comply with U.S. copyright law may be restored. The U.S. Copyright Office published a list of restored copyrights for which it has processed Notices of Intent to Enforce a Copyright restored under the Uruguay Rounds Agreements Act.

This list, effective May 1, creates a public record for identifying restored copyright owners and works for which Notices of Intent to Enforce have been filed. The listed works include the J.R. Abbey color plate books, and several movies of Alameda Films, SA, including "The Vampire's Coffin" and "Cucurrucucu Pigeon." [The Editors do not know whether these movies have enjoyed commercial success in the U.S.].  Citation: 61 Federal Register 19372 (May 1, 1996).

Procedures issued for immigration appeals in the U.S.:  The U.S. Department of Justice has streamlined the rules for appeals before the Board of Immigration Appeals [8 C.F.R. Parts 1, 3, 103, 208, 212, 242, 246]. The new rule establishes time and number limitations on motions to reopen and makes certain changes to appellate procedure, mostly to reflect Section 545 of the Immigration Act of 1990. The new rule enters into force on July 1, 1996.  Citation: 61 Federal Register 18900 (April 29, 1996).

Two U.S. cases are pending before the ICJ: Two cases involving the U.S. as a party are presently pending before the International Court of Justice: (1) Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of America), and (2) Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America).  Citation: ICJ Communiqué No. 96/14 (2 April 1996).

U.S. treaties to continue for Micronesia:  The Government of the Federated States of Micronesia notified the Secretary-General of the United Nations that it has extended until 3 November 1997 the period for examining treaties concluded by the U.S. on behalf of Micronesia. Micronesia intends to continue treaties that have been validly concluded and that do not conflict with the Micronesia constitution.  Citation: 1996 [German] Bundesgesetzblatt II, number 13, page 356, 2 April 1996 [Editor's note: Micronesia is an archipelago of 702 square miles in the western Pacific Ocean. On November 3, 1986, it became independent from the U.S-administered UN Trusteeship].