wikileaks ico  Home papers ico  Cables mirror and Afghan War Diary privacy policy Privacy
Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05VIENNA317
2005-02-04 07:04:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Vienna
Cable title:  

AUSTRIAN RESPONSE: PROGRESS TOWARDS COMPLETING

Tags:   CJAN  AU 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
						UNCLAS VIENNA 000317 

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR CA/OCS/ACS/EUR AND EUR/AGS
L/LEI FOR KEN PROPP

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CJAN AU
SUBJECT: AUSTRIAN RESPONSE: PROGRESS TOWARDS COMPLETING
INSTRUMENTS IMPLEMENTING U.S.- EU. EXTRADITION AND MUTUAL
ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT

REF: A) STATE 8107 B) VIENNA 243

UNCLAS VIENNA 000317

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR CA/OCS/ACS/EUR AND EUR/AGS
L/LEI FOR KEN PROPP

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CJAN AU
SUBJECT: AUSTRIAN RESPONSE: PROGRESS TOWARDS COMPLETING
INSTRUMENTS IMPLEMENTING U.S.- EU. EXTRADITION AND MUTUAL
ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT

REF: A) STATE 8107 B) VIENNA 243


1. Under cover of a note verbale, Embassy has just
received a formal Austrian response to the latest
November 15, 2004 proposals for completing the texts of
the extradition and mutual legal assistance protocols.
In a telephone conversation our contacts at the MFA
suggested these were only minor technical issues relating
to the "final clauses". Consular Section is verifying
whether other substantive issues remain open that would
require further negotiations.


2. An informal translation of the above-mentioned
Austrian note with the suggested changes reads as
follows:

(Complimenary opening)

1) Since the final clauses deal with the two instruments
referred to as "Protocols" (also in all the other treaty
provisions), the Austrian side would favor also using the
term "this Protocol" in the final clauses.

2) Austria notes that in the final clauses reference is
made to the "Extradition Agreement" and the "Mutual Legal
Assistance Agreement" as opposed to the short forms
proposed in the two preambles as being "the U.S.-EU
Extradition Agreement and "the U.S.-EU Mutual Assistance
Agreement". The Austrian side would favor the use of the
latter short forms, which are used in most other protocol
articles.

3) In the final clauses Austria would favor using the
term "both parties" as opposed to specifying "the
Republic of Austria" and "the United States of America",
where appropriate. Using the term "both parties" would
facilitate the preparation of the final texts and
eliminate the need for the alternating rule. Should the
final proposed clauses remain as they are, the contract
parties' names must be alternated. This means the
English language text intended for Austria would need to
read "subject to the completion by the Republic of
Austria and the United States of America of. " whereas
the text for the U.S. would have to read "subject to the
completion by the United States of America and the
Republic of Austria of.". The same rule of alternation
would need to be applied for the German version text.

(Complimentary close)

BROWN