7 FAM 930
COMPULSION OF EVIDENCE
(CT:CON-804; 04-30-2018)
(Office OF Origin: CA/OCL)
7 FAM 931 TESTIMONY BY LETTERS
ROGATORY/Letters of REQUEST
7 FAM 931.1 Purpose
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. When a witness is unwilling to testify voluntarily,
the usual way to compel the required evidence is by a letter rogatory, also
known as letter of request, from a court in one country to a court in another
country, requesting judicial assistance. (See 22 CFR 92.54.) Letters rogatory
may also be used to serve legal documents (28 U.S.C. 1696). (See 7 FAM 950).
b. The Departments authority to receive and transmit
letters rogatory is from 28 U.S.C. 1781.
c. Letters rogatory typically take from 6 months to a
year to execute. Persons who inquire concerning this option should be advised
of the protracted time frame involved. Consular officers should nevertheless
make monthly inquiries of the host government to trace their progress.
d. 7 FAM 962
provides information regarding criminal matters.
7 FAM 931.2 Issuance
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. See the Department of State, Bureau of Consular
Affairs Internet page for our Preparation of Letters Rogatory feature.
b. Letters rogatory must be issued under the seal of
the court and the signature of the judge and addressed, simply:
To the appropriate judicial authority of
(name of country).
|
b. Some foreign jurisdictions require that the request
be authenticated by the U.S. Department of State Authentications Office and by
the consul of the foreign country in the United States (see 7 FAM 870) or
authenticated in accordance with the Hague Legalization Convention (see 7 FAM 876).
Requests under the Hague Evidence Convention (see 7 FAM 935.1)
need no authentication; submit them directly to the foreign central authority.
c. For matters pending before an administrative law
judge, it is advisable to obtain a letter rogatory from a U.S. District Court
under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651, as many countries will not execute a
letter rogatory issued by an administrative law judge.
7 FAM 931.3 Submission to
Department
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. Letters rogatory and accompanying documents must be
translated into the language of the foreign country and submitted in duplicate
(an original and one copy of both the English language version and the
translation) directly to the Department (CA/OCS/ACS) or to the U.S. Embassy.
The Department also requires submission of a certified check or international
money order for the current fee for letters rogatory (see 22 CFR 22.1), made
payable to the American Embassy, with the documents as a deposit for costs
incurred in executing the request.
b. 7 FAM 960
provides information regarding requests from foreign tribunals for assistance
from the United States.
7 FAM 931.4 Review of Letters
Rogatory by CA/OCS
(CT:CON-449; 03-25-2013)
CA/OCS/ACS will review the letters rogatory for technical
completeness (number of copies, translations, seals). (See the CA/OCS Intranet
letters rogatory feature). For legal questions, consult CA/OCS/L
(Ask-OCS-L@state.gov), which may consult with the Office of the Legal Adviser
and the Department of Justice (DOJ) as appropriate.
7 FAM 931.5 Submission to Foreign
Ministry
(CT:CON-187; 09-11-2007)
a. When the documents have been reviewed by the
Department (CA/OCS) for compliance with these provisions and host country
requirements, they are sent to the consular officer. The officers role in the
execution of the letter rogatory is not limited to transmitting the documents
to the Foreign Ministry. The officer must also report to the Department
(CA/OCS):
(1) The date the documents were received at the post;
(2) The date they were transmitted to the Foreign
Ministry; and
(3) The dates they were received by the Ministry of
Justice and the court that is to execute the request.
b. 7 FAM Exhibit
931.5 provides a sample diplomatic note transmitting a letter rogatory and
a preparation guide.
7 FAM 931.6 Return of Executed
Letter Rogatory to the Department
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
When a letter rogatory has been completed, return it to
the Department in an envelope sealed with a rubber seal and bearing the mailing
address of the clerk of the court in the United States from which the request
came, as well as the name and docket number of the case. Before placing the
executed request in the envelope, the consular officer should endorse on it a
certificate stating the date and place of its receipt.
7 FAM 932 Retention of Local Counsel
for a U.S. Prosecutor
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
Some countries require that local counsel be retained when
testimony or other evidence is to be obtained by letters rogatory. In such
cases consular officers will be called upon by the Federal agency concerned to
retain a local attorney for the prosecutor in the United States. Be certain to
receive an appropriation number and funding code before retaining such
counsel. (See 2
FAM 283).
7 FAM 933 EXPEDITIOUS EVIDENCE
GATHERING: AUTHENTICATED COPIES OF DOCUMENTARY AND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
7 FAM 933.1 Urgent Need for
Evidence
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. Government agencies often require documentary and
physical evidence relating to criminal and civil cases pending in U.S. courts. The constraints of the Speedy Trial Act (18 U.S.C. 3161) or similar State laws
frequently require that such evidence be obtained expeditiously. Requests for
evidence must come from the Department and should be given priority by the
consular officer.
b. In no case should a consular officer obtain
documentary evidence (corporate or bank records, for example) in a civil or
criminal case, when such requests are made by private persons or do not come
through the usual channels of the host country judicial system. If a request
comes from outside the Department, consult CA/OCS before providing assistance
for clarification of the propriety and validity of the request.
7 FAM 933.2 Scope of Consular
Assistance
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. While not an investigative agency, the Department
sometimes will ask consular officers to obtain records (such as business
registrations and bank records) where there is a government interest.
b. Occasionally, a consular officer may be requested to
perform such tasks as obtaining authenticated copies of fingerprints,
voiceprints, handwriting analysis reports, host country passport files or
photographs, or arranging for appraisals or for medical examinations of
witnesses. All such evidence must be authenticated (see 7 FAM 875 and
CA/OCS Intranet, judicial assistance feature, Department of Justice
Authentication Certificate Models).
7 FAM 933.3 Expeditious Transmission
of Evidence
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. A consular officer may be asked to send evidence to
the Department by pilot package on a commercial aircraft. In such cases, be
sure that the requesting party understands that the airlines charge for such services
and that payment must be arranged in advance (in the form of a Federal
appropriation number and fund code, ideally prepayment of the carrier:
alternatively by monies received by the Department).
b. At times, requesting U.S. authorities may send messengers
to hand-deliver the evidence or request that post personnel traveling to Washington hand-deliver the evidence to the Department (CA/OCS).
7 FAM 934 ABSENCE OF OFFICIAL RECORD
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
The certification of absence of official record (7 FAM 875)
should be used when appropriate, and the documents must then be authenticated
by the consular officer, using the specific Authentication Certificate, not a
Form DS-1982, General Authentication Certificate. The CA/OCS Intranet judicial
assistance feature and the Department of Justice Authentication Certificate
Models provide additional information.
7 FAM 935 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS ON
EVIDENCE
7 FAM 935.1 The Hague Evidence
Convention
(CT:CON-407; 06-29-2012)
a. The Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence
Abroad in Civil and Commercial Matters (Hague Evidence Convention) is a
multilateral treaty that establishes procedures for the taking of voluntary
depositions and commission and the compelling of evidence pursuant to a formal
letter of request transmitted in accordance with the Convention to the foreign
central authority.
b. Reservations and Declarations: Some countries that
are party to the Convention have made reservations and declarations regarding
the applicability of each article of the Convention in their country. For
example, certain countries object to the provisions of Article 17 the taking of
voluntary evidence by a person appointed as a commissioner. The Hague
Conference on Private International Law Hague Evidence Convention Status Page,
lists declarations and reservations for each country party to the Convention.
Persons interested in the Convention should examine those reservations and
declarations. In particular, see; declarations and reservations against
pretrial discovery of documents.
Country
|
Entered Into Force (EIF)
|
Notes
|
Argentina
|
July 7, 1987
|
Objects to All of Chapter 2 voluntary depositions.
|
Australia
|
December 22, 1992
|
Objects to pre-trial discovery of documents
|
Barbados
|
May 4, 1981
|
|
Belarus
|
October 6, 2001
|
Voluntary depositions permitted without prior
permission of Central Authority
|
Bulgaria
|
January 22, 2000
|
Objects to voluntary deposition provisions of
Articles 16,17,18,19 of Chapter 2. Objects to Pretrial discovery of documents.
|
China, Peoples Republic of
|
February 6, 1998
|
Objects to Chapter 2 provisions regarding voluntary
depositions.
|
China, Hong Kong SAR
|
|
Permits voluntary depositions
|
China, Macao SAR
|
|
Permits voluntary depositions
|
Czech Republic
|
July 11, 1976
|
|
Denmark
|
October 7, 1972
|
|
Estonia
|
April 2, 1996
|
|
Finland
|
June 6, 1976
|
|
France
|
October 6, 1974
|
Convention applies to entire Territory of France: Metropolitan France, Overseas Departments (French Guyana, Guadeloupe, Reunion,
Martinique) and all other French overseas territories.
|
Germany
|
June 26, 1979
|
Permission of the Central Authority of Germany
required before voluntary depositions may be taken on a case by case basis
|
Greece
|
March 19, 2005
|
|
Hungary
|
September 11, 2004
|
Consular depositions (Article 15) without prior
permission of Central Authority permitted. Commissioners (Article 17) may
apply to Central Authority for permission to take depositions outside of
consular auspices. Objects to pre-trial discovery of documents.
|
India
|
April 8, 2007
|
|
Israel
|
September 17, 1979
|
|
Italy
|
August 21, 1982
|
|
Kuwait
|
July 7, 2002
|
No declarations or reservations.
|
Latvia
|
May 27, 1995
|
|
Lithuania
|
October 1, 2000
|
Prior permission required for consular and
commissioner depositions of willing witnesses who are citizens of Lithuania
|
Luxembourg
|
September 24, 1977
|
Prior permission of Central Authority required for
depositions by commissioners (Article 17)
|
Mexico
|
September 25, 1989
|
Objects to provisions on voluntary depositions and
pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Monaco
|
March 18, 1986
|
Depositions require permission of the Central
Authority.
|
Netherlands
|
June 7, 1981
|
Extended to Aruba
|
Norway
|
October 7, 1972
|
Consular depositions require prior permission of
Central Authority.
|
Poland
|
April 13, 1996
|
Objects to Chapter 2, except Article 15.
|
Portugal
|
May 11, 1975
|
Depositions require prior permission of the Central
Authority. Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Romania
|
October 20, 2003
|
No voluntary depositions. Objects to pretrial
discovery of documents.
|
Russian Federation
|
June 30, 2001
|
Not in Force between Russian Federal and the United
States No Central Authority Named By Russian Federation.
|
Seychelles
|
March 7, 2004
|
Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Singapore
|
December 26, 1978
|
Objects to all of Chapter 2 voluntary depositions
by consuls or commissioners. Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Slovak Republic
|
July 11, 1976
|
|
South Africa
|
September 6, 1997
|
Objects to Articles 15 and 16. Evidence may not be
taken under Article 17 without prior permission of Central Authority.
|
Spain
|
July 21, 1987
|
Voluntary depositions may be taken without prior
permission of the Central Authority on consular premises. Objects to
pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Sri Lanka
|
October 30, 2000
|
Objects to all of Chapter 2 voluntary depositions.
Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Sweden
|
July 1, 1975
|
Taking of depositions requires prior permission of
Central Authority. Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Switzerland
|
January 1, 1995
|
Taking of depositions requires prior permission of
the Central Authority of the Canton.
|
Turkey
|
October 12, 2004
|
Commissioners may apply to Central Authority for
permission to take depositions. Objects to pretrial discovery of documents.
|
Ukraine
|
April 1, 2001
|
Objects to Chapter 2, except Article 15, 20, 21, 22
no depositions by commissioners. Consular depositions permitted.
|
United Kingdom
|
September 14, 1976
|
Extended to Akrotiri and Dhekella, Sovereign Base
Areas in the Island of Cyprus; Anguilla, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands,
Gibraltar, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey
|
United States
|
October 7, 1972
|
|
Venezuela
|
December 31, 1993
|
Venezuela objects to Chapter 2 taking of testimony
by commissioners
|
c. Reference and Resources:
Hague Conference
Hague Conference on Private International Law Hague
Evidence Page
Outline of the Hague Evidence Convention
Conclusions and Recommendations of the 2003 Special
Commission on the Practical Operation of the Hague Evidence Convention
2003 Questionnaire for Special Commission on the
Practical Operation of the Hague Evidence Convention
Practical Operation Documents
Department of State
Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs,
Judicial Assistance Page Operation of the Hague Evidence Convention and
Country Specific features
|
d. Model Letter of Request: A model letter of request
recommended for use can be found on the Hague Conference on Private International
Law home page.
e. U.S. Central Authority: The U.S. Central Authority
for the Hague Evidence Convention is:
Office of International Judicial Assistance
Civil Division
Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530
Requests from foreign courts may be sent directly
to the U.S. Central Authority.
f. Requests from U.S. Courts to Obtain Evidence
Abroad: Letters of request by parties in the United States pursuant to the
Convention are transmitted by the requesting court directly to the foreign
central authority.
g. Foreign Central Authorities: Under the terms of the
Convention, each country establishes a central authority that receives
requests and monitors their execution. The Hague Conference on Private
International Law Hague Evidence Convention Authorities Page includes certain
information about foreign central authorities. Because the consular officer
may be called to contact the central authority in the host country to ascertain
the status of a request from time to time, the officer should maintain a
current record of the name and address of the host country central authority.
h. In Force: See the Hague Conference on Private
International Law Hague Evidence Convention Status page for a current list of
countries party to the Convention.
7 FAM 935.2 Other Treaties
(CT:CON-126; 01-25-2006)
a. The United States is not a party to the
Inter-American Convention on Letter Rogatory provisions regarding the taking of
evidence. The United States is a party to the Inter-American Convention on Letters
Rogatory and Additional Protocol provisions on service of process. (See 7 FAM 950).
b. 7 FAM 960
provides information regarding treaties on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal
Matters.
7 FAM 936 through 939 Unassigned
7 FAM Exhibit 931.5
SAMPLE OF A DIPOMATIC NOTE TRANSMITTING A LETTER ROGATORY
(CT:CON-187; 09-11-2007)
(Appropriate complimentary opening)
The Embassy of the United States of America presents its
compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and requests the Ministrys
aid in transmitting the enclosed request for international judicial
assistance to the appropriate judicial authority of the Republic of Argentenia.
The Circuit Court for the Fifth District of California
has transmitted the annexed letter rogatory in the matter of Syvia Maria
Gomez de Suarez v. Jose Antonio Munoz Rivas. The case is a civil matter
pending before the Circuit Court for the Fifth District of California
concerning a motion for divorce. The letter rogatory requests compulsion of
evidence from Jose Antonio Munoz Riva, 1258 Avenida Colombia, Buenos Aires,
Argentina. The Circuit Court has provided funds to reimburse any costs
incurred in executing the letter rogatory.
The Embassy is grateful for the Ministrys assistance in
the interests of justice. Be assured that the Circuit Court will provide
similar assistance to the judicial authorities of Argentina. The Embassy
would appreciate being kept advised of the progress of the letter rogatory
specifically the date it is assigned to the appropriate judicial authority
for service.
(Appropriate complimentary closing)
|
GUIDE FOR PREPARATION OF A DIPLOMATIC NOTE TRANSMITTING A
LETTER ROGATORY
In addition to following standard guidelines for
preparation of a diplomatic note, be sure to:
1. Include the name of the court which has action in
the case.
2. Specify the names of the litigants.
3. Indicate whether the case involves a civil or
criminal matter.
4. Specify what type of case is involved (brief
details).
5. Mention the type of action to be effected (service
of process/obtaining evidence).
6. Name the person to be served or deposed.
7. Include the full address given in the letter
rogatory.
8. Indicate the arrangement for payment of costs of
service.
9. Specify the concern for the pursuit of justice.
10. Volunteer reciprocal assistance.
11. Request that the Ministry keep the post informed of
progress in execution of the request.
(For instructions on how to format a diplomatic note, see
the Department's Correspondence Handbook, 5 FAH-1 .)
|