Seven States Consider Sanctions Legislation As NFTC Moves against Illinois Law on Sudan

International Trade
Seven States Consider Sanctions Legislation
As NFTC Moves Against Illinois Law on Sudan

The National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) Aug. 7 filed a lawsuit challenging an Illinois law imposing sanctions against companies with ties to Sudan, saying that six other states have enacted similar legislation and seven more states were considering related punitive measures, including Texas and California.

Joining the NFTC as plaintiffs in the llinois case (NFTC v. Topinka) were eight boards of public employee pension funds, along with nine individuals.

William A. Reinsch, president of the NFTC, said that the lawsuit–filed in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois–was meant to send a signal to other states that the U.S. Constitution limits the conduct of foreign policy to the federal government and not the states.

“We believe the Constitution intends that the president should have the flexibility to craft foreign policy that combines incentives and disincentives intended to change the behavior of foreign governments, like Sudan, and that sanctions imposed by individual states or local governments inevitably end up tying the president’s hands,” Reinsch said. “The Illinois law inflicts pain for no gain, with the pain falling particularly on the pension funds of police officers and firefighters who have put their lives on the line to protect the citizens of Illinois.”

Reinsch told reporters that the lawsuit against Illinois’ “Act to End Terrorism and Atrocities in Sudan,” which took effect on Jan. 27, rests on a unanimous ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 that a Massachusetts law applying sanctions against Burma was unconstitutional because it could undermine the president’s ability to conduct effective diplomacy (Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, U.S., No. 99-474, 6/19/00).

The NFTC, which represents some 300 U.S. companies with interests in international trade and investment including The Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., Microsoft Corp., Ford Motor Co., and General Motors Corp., said that eight Illinois pension funds had joined the NFTC as plaintiffs in the case because the Sudan sanctions law will force them to divest of some mutual funds and other equities and accept lower yields in alternative investment vehicles, primarily in the bond market.

Winston & Strawn LLP has been retained by the NFTC to litigate the case.


Injunctive Relief Sought


The NFTC and the other plaintiffs also plan to file a motion for injunctive relief to prevent the continued implementation of the Illinois law during the course of the lawsuit, officials said.

Under the Illinois law, banks and other financial institutions will be required to certify that their borrowers have no direct or indirect business ties to Sudan, and it will prohibit the state from using such institutions as depositories for state funds unless they can so certify.

The NFTC said that a U.S. company, for example, could be considered a “forbidden entity” if an affiliate in Europe operates a hotel in Khartoum or a joint venture in China sells a household product to a distributor in Sudan.

Under the law, public employee pension funds in Illinois will also be prohibited from holding shares of companies designated as forbidden entities and are being required to liquidate their holdings of equities and international mutual funds that contain shares of such entities.

“The ultimate losers will be the individual and corporate taxpayers who serve as the state’s definitive guarantors of all pension obligations,” the NFTC said.


Seven States Consider Similar Laws


Six other states–Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, Louisiana, and Oregon–have enacted legislation imposing sanctions against Sudan or terrorism-supporting countries, according to the NFTC, and seven additional states are considering similar measures: California, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, Rhode Island, and Texas.

Legislation now before the California Senate, for instance, would prohibit the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California State Treasurers’ Retirement System from investing in companies with active business operations in Sudan and would require them to sell or transfer their existing holdings by Jan. 1, 2008.

The legislation (AB 2941) was approved by the state Senate Committee on Public Employment and Retirement in June of this year, and the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill for later this month.

A bill pending consideration in the Texas state House (HB 815) would prohibit state funds from being invested in equities or obligations of private corporations or other private business entities doing business in Sudan.

Several related measures, however, have died in committee in a number of states, including Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, and New York.

Then-President Clinton banned U.S. trade and investment with Sudan by Executive Order in 1997, and Congress codified those sanctions in 2003 as part of the so-called Sudan Peace Act.End of article graphic

Seven States Consider Sanctions Legislation As NFTC Moves against Illinois Law on Sudan

The National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) Aug. 7 filed a lawsuit challenging an Illinois law imposing sanctions against companies with ties to Sudan, saying that six other states have enacted similar legislation and seven more states were considering related punitive measures, including Texas and California.

Joining the NFTC as plaintiffs in the llinois case (NFTC v. Topinka) were eight boards of public employee pension funds, along with nine individuals.

William A. Reinsch, president of the NFTC, said that the lawsuit–filed in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois–was meant to send a signal to other states that the U.S. Constitution limits the conduct of foreign policy to the federal government and not the states.

“We believe the Constitution intends that the president should have the flexibility to craft foreign policy that combines incentives and disincentives intended to change the behavior of foreign governments, like Sudan, and that sanctions imposed by individual states or local governments inevitably end up tying the president’s hands,” Reinsch said. “The Illinois law inflicts pain for no gain, with the pain falling particularly on the pension funds of police officers and firefighters who have put their lives on the line to protect the citizens of Illinois.”

Reinsch told reporters that the lawsuit against Illinois’ “Act to End Terrorism and Atrocities in Sudan,” which took effect on Jan. 27, rests on a unanimous ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 that a Massachusetts law applying sanctions against Burma was unconstitutional because it could undermine the president’s ability to conduct effective diplomacy (Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, U.S., No. 99-474, 6/19/00).

The NFTC, which represents some 300 U.S. companies with interests in international trade and investment including The Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., Microsoft Corp., Ford Motor Co., and General Motors Corp., said that eight Illinois pension funds had joined the NFTC as plaintiffs in the case because the Sudan sanctions law will force them to divest of some mutual funds and other equities and accept lower yields in alternative investment vehicles, primarily in the bond market.

Winston & Strawn LLP has been retained by the NFTC to litigate the case.

 

Injunctive Relief Sought


The NFTC and the other plaintiffs also plan to file a motion for injunctive relief to prevent the continued implementation of the Illinois law during the course of the lawsuit, officials said.

Under the Illinois law, banks and other financial institutions will be required to certify that their borrowers have no direct or indirect business ties to Sudan, and it will prohibit the state from using such institutions as depositories for state funds unless they can so certify.

The NFTC said that a U.S. company, for example, could be considered a “forbidden entity” if an affiliate in Europe operates a hotel in Khartoum or a joint venture in China sells a household product to a distributor in Sudan.

Under the law, public employee pension funds in Illinois will also be prohibited from holding shares of companies designated as forbidden entities and are being required to liquidate their holdings of equities and international mutual funds that contain shares of such entities.

“The ultimate losers will be the individual and corporate taxpayers who serve as the state’s definitive guarantors of all pension obligations,” the NFTC said.

 

Seven States Consider Similar Laws


Six other states–Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, Louisiana, and Oregon–have enacted legislation imposing sanctions against Sudan or terrorism-supporting countries, according to the NFTC, and seven additional states are considering similar measures: California, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, Rhode Island, and Texas.

Legislation now before the California Senate, for instance, would prohibit the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California State Treasurers’ Retirement System from investing in companies with active business operations in Sudan and would require them to sell or transfer their existing holdings by Jan. 1, 2008.

The legislation (AB 2941) was approved by the state Senate Committee on Public Employment and Retirement in June of this year, and the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill for later this month.

A bill pending consideration in the Texas state House (HB 815) would prohibit state funds from being invested in equities or obligations of private corporations or other private business entities doing business in Sudan.

Several related measures, however, have died in committee in a number of states, including Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, and New York.

Then-President Clinton banned U.S. trade and investment with Sudan by Executive Order in 1997, and Congress codified those sanctions in 2003 as part of the so-called Sudan Peace Act.End of article graphic

NFTC Urges WTO Negotiators to Go the Extra Distance to Restart Doha Trade Talks

Calls for Getting Back to First Principles and Ambitious Objectives

Washington, DC The NFTC today issued the following statement regarding situation in the WTO’s Doha Round of trade negotiations:

Mary Irace, NFTC Vice President for Trade and Export Finance, today urged WTO Members to go the extra distance to restart the suspended Doha Round negotiations.

Irace, who has just completed an intensive series of meetings with ambassadors and other senior officials in delegations to the WTO, noted, “The disappointment of the business community at the failure to make a break through on agriculture is clearly shared by WTO representatives in Geneva. At this critical moment we could see the enormous promise of the Doha Round just slip away. Failure would create serious risk and uncertainty in the global economy which would hurt prospects for world growth and development, and potentially sap business confidence.”

Following her meetings in Geneva, Irace noted, “I am impressed that delegations are already reengaging to try to find a way forward. The suspension of the talks was a wake-up call. Do WTO Members want a credible multilateral trading system that expands trade with widespread economic benefits?  Or will WTO Members pursue a harmful zero-sum approach to global trade policy making which reduces growth and economic opportunity? The NFTC believes it is time to get back to basics and push for real trade opening as a way to raise living standards worldwide.”

“The NFTC considers that success will require political will and vision from all the major partners. Certainly the US and the EU have critical roles to play, but so do advanced developing countries where the lion’s share of global growth will occur over the next 20 years. It is time that all those countries with a stake in open markets stood up to be counted. This certainly includes China as the world’s number three trader, but it also means that smaller developing and developed countries must play a bigger role in the search for an ambitious outcome,” Irace stated.

“Paring back ambition is clearly not the way forward. A major outcome with commercially meaningful results is the only way to build a strong foundation for the global economy in the years ahead,” Irace added.

 


 

Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

 

NFTC Applauds Senate Finance Committee for Timely Action on U.S.-Peru Trade Agreement

Washington, DCThe National Foreign Trade Council today praised the Senate Finance Committee for its prompt evaluation of the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA). Today’s mock markup follows a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the agreement held July 12, 2006.

 

“The committee’s action today on the PTPA sends an important signal that Congress looks to move forward on the agreement within a reasonable time frame and with all appropriate consideration,” said Anne Alonzo, National Foreign Trade Council Senior Vice President. “The agreement is solidly constructed and is designed to broaden economic opportunities for the U.S. business community, our workforce and consumers,” said Alonzo.

 

Under the terms of the agreement, there will be continued and increased market access for U.S. goods, including machinery, agricultural exports, plastics and other products. Last year, two-way trade between the United States and Peru reached $7.4 billion, with $2.3 billion coming from U.S. exports.

 

“The agreement is important to U.S. efforts to enhance trade relations and promote economic growth and development in Central and South America,” said Alonzo, who is also Co-Chair of the Hispanic Alliance for Free Trade (HAFT). “It also provides opportunities for Hispanic businesses, which often have many cultural connections to the region, to benefit from the proposed tenants of the agreement.”

 

The provisions of the PTPA eliminate tariffs and other barriers to trade between the two countries. Currently, under the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Extradition Act (ATPDEA) set to expire in December, many exports from Peru enter the United States duty-free, while U.S. goods and services are assigned an average weighted tariff of roughly nine percent. However, implementation of the PTPA will level this differential and allow for reciprocal market access, forging a mutually beneficial commercial partnership between the U.S. and Peru.

 

“We are encouraged by both chambers’ timely review of the PTPA and we ask that members continue to move swiftly to implement the agreement,” concluded Alonzo.

 


 

Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

NFTC Praises Senate Finance Committee for Vote on U.S.-Vietnam PNTR Legislation

Calls for Similar Prompt Action in House Ways and Means

 

Washington, DC – The National Foreign Trade Council today issued a statement praising the Senate Finance Committee for favorably voting on legislation aimed at providing Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) treatment to Vietnam.

 

“Today’s markup of legislation providing PNTR to Vietnam indicates the strong support for this important final step in normalization of relations with Vietnam,” said NFTC President Bill Reinsch. “There seems to be little question of the value of this measure.  Granting PNTR is necessary to ensure that the United States receive the full benefits of Vietnam’s WTO market-opening and rules commitments upon Vietnam‘s accession to the WTO.  The question now is timing,” added NFTC President Bill Reinsch.

 

Vietnam’s WTO accession is expected to occur in October.  With the House already in recess, and the Senate next week, the granting of PNTR must be taken up in September for the United States not to have to file a non-application clause upon Vietnam’s accession.  In addition, President Bush is expected to travel to Hanoi in November.

 

“We urge prompt Congressional action.  It is vital that PNTR be granted prior to these important fall dates so that the U.S. can continue to grow trade with Vietnam and advance American foreign policy objects in Southeast Asia,” concluded Reinsch. 

 


 

Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

 

U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Coalition Welcomes Bahrain FTA Entry Into Force

Implementation a Catalyst for Economic Growth

 

Washington, DCThe U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Coalition today commended both the U.S. and Bahraini governments for working diligently to achieve an August 1, 2006 implementation date for the U.S.-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement (FTA) to enter into force. President Bush signed the FTA into law January 11, 2006, following commendable, bipartisan Congressional votes on the agreement.

 

“The opening of trade with Bahrain is important to the expansion of U.S. business, products and services into new markets in the Middle East. The FTA is a high quality agreement that will benefit both countries and further strengthen ties with an important ally in the region,” said Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.

 

Beginning next week, under the terms of the agreement, all American consumer and industrial product exports to Bahrain will enter duty-free. Similarly, 98% of U.S. agricultural tariff lines will be eliminated with the remaining 2% phased out over 10 years.

 

“We commend our government and the Bahrainis for committing to a trade agreement with such high standards and for working quickly to see its provisions put into practice,” said Peter Tichansky, President of the Business Council for International Understanding. “The agreement’s entry into force is vital to the President’s initiative to establish a Middle East Free Trade Area by 2013.”

 

In addition to the Bahrain FTA, in the Middle East, Free Trade Agreements already exist between the United States and Israel, Jordan and Morocco. The U.S.-Oman FTA recently passed the U.S. House of Representatives and The United States Trade Representative is currently negotiating an agreement with the United Arab Emirates.

 

The U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Coalition, managed jointly by the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) and the Business Council for International Understanding (BCIU), is made up of over 120 U.S. companies and associations supporting trade expansion and economic development in the Middle East.


Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

The Business Council for International Understanding (BCIU), a U.S. business association founded in 1955 at White House initiative, is dedicated to promoting dialogue and action between the business and government communities for the purpose of expanding international commerce.

 

NFTC Praises House-Passed CFIUS Bill as Rational Approach to Reform

Washington, DC – The National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) today expressed its support for the “National Security Foreign Investment Reform and Strengthened Transparency Act of 2006.” The legislation will help to reform the national security review process of foreign investment by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Passed by a vote of 424 to 0, the bill was taken up under suspension of the rules. 

 

“This bill takes a reasonable approach to reforming the CFIUS process.  Its provisions both protect our national security and ensure that the flow of foreign investment into the United States is not unnecessarily impeded,” said Bill Reinsch, president of the NFTC. “Today, the House has shown its commitment to making reasonable changes to CFIUS processes for vetting foreign investments and while NFTC still has some concerns about a few of the particulars, we are pleased with the careful thought members of the House have given to this matter,” Reinsch added.

 

Direct foreign investment in the United States has been more than $530 billion over the past three years. In addition, these investment dollars are directly tied to more than five million American jobs.

 

 


 

Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

 

NFTC Urges Leadership by Developing Countries and Opposes a 20% NAMA Coefficient

For Round to be Successful, Politics Must Catch Up with Economics

 

Washington, DC – Today, NFTC Vice President Mary Irace issued the following statement on the Doha Round negotiations:

 

“The NFTC is very concerned about calls for lower ambition by Director General Lamy and the continued lack of political leadership by key WTO Members.

 

“Now is the time to keep our focus on what is at stake in the Doha Round – the future relevance and credibility of the WTO as a force for multilateral trade liberalization and improved trade governance, and the deeper integration of developing countries into the global trading system.

 

“The politics have not caught up with the realities of our increasingly globalized economy.  One thing is clear in today’s global marketplace — countries that want to grow and move up the ladder of development must remove barriers to trade and investment and put in place sound and transparent rules to govern global economic engagement.  This is why so many developing countries are interested in negotiating high standard and comprehensive free trade agreements with the United States. Comparing the state of play in the Doha Round to the Uruguay Round, as some have recently done, is a false comparison because the global economy is dramatically different.  We should look forward not backwards and set our sights high.

 

“The NFTC has been a major and active supporter of the WTO and a successful Doha Round.  We continue to support an ambitious outcome across all core areas – agriculture, goods and services.  At the end of the day, the true test for the NFTC and its members will be substantial new market access.  All countries have a stake in this and not just on agriculture, which represents only 8.8% of world trade.  For example, 40% of trade in goods is among developing countries and these countries pay the most of their tariffs — 70% — to each other.  On services, the NFTC is about to release a paper which will show that over 50 developing countries export $1 billion in services each year, and four of the top ten services exporters are developing countries. 

 

“In key respects, the ultimate fate of the Round will depend on the ability of advanced developing countries to step up to the plate and lead.  These countries can and must be a catalyst for success.  Based on NFTC analyses of its member companies’ top exports into advanced developing countries, a 20% coefficient will not achieve substantial new market access and we would not support such an outcome.  It may be time to consider a third coefficient of 15% for advanced developing countries and a slightly higher coefficient for less advanced countries.  The NAMA outcome on “flexibilities” and a robust sectoral and non-tariff barrier package will also be critical to a successful Doha Round.” 

 


Advancing Global Commerce for Over 90 Years

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves hundreds of member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

 

Testimony of William A. Reinsch, President, National Foreign Trade Council, Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, UN Convention Against Corruption

Testimony of William A. Reinsch

President, National Foreign Trade Council

& Co-Chairman ofUSA*Engage

 

Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

 

UN Convention Against Corruption

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of Senate ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption.  I am the President of the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), a trade association of more than 300 companies committed to an open, rules-based trading system.  Along with our USA*Engage coalition, we support multilateral cooperation and economic, humanitarian and diplomatic engagement as the most effective means of advancing U.S. foreign policy interests and American values. 

 

My testimony details the American business community’s support for swift ratification of the Convention in accordance with the statements received from the Administration in its transmittal package.

 

American business understands that corruption is highly detrimental to the global trading system.  It impedes economic growth and development and siphons money from productive uses.  In addition, it disadvantages U.S. firms internationally, as domestic laws like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act have held American firms to higher standards than many of their foreign competitors.  The business community supports efforts to create a more stringent anticorruption regime and thereby raise the bar for the behavior of foreign businesses and governments and in the process promote expanded investment and growth. 

 

Ten organizations, including the NFTC, American Petroleum Institute, Business Roundtable, National Association of Manufacturers, U.S. Chamber of Commerce and U.S. Council for International Business, have written you, Mr. Chairman, indicating that “the Convention can be a critical tool in the global fight against corruption,” and that it “is non-controversial and has broad support.” The letter states that “timely Senate ratification is necessary for the United States to play a leadership role in moving implementation forward.”  Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask that this letter be included in the record following my testimony. 

 

The business community has come to its support for the Convention after a long and fruitful dialogue with representatives of the Administration, including those who negotiated the document.  I would like to thank these individuals for their hard work on this Convention and for their outreach to the business community.  In particular, former Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs Tony Wayne and his staff should be commended for their efforts. 

 

Our interaction with Ambassador Wayne and his staff is a fine example of how good government is supposed to work.  During the negotiation of the Convention, some of my members raised concerns as to how this new instrument might affect U.S. law and questioned its potential domestic impact on American companies.  Administration officials carefully listened to our concerns, participated in an extensive, open and frank dialogue, and provided detailed language in the transmittal package that enables us to come to four very positive conclusions about the potential of the Convention to benefit American business:

 

1)         The Convention will level the playing field for U.S. businesses.

2)         There are no domestic costs or obligations imposed on the United States.

3)         Effective and transparent implementation by foreign governments is imperative.

4)         The Convention will benefit trade and improve investment climates worldwide.

 

I would like to discuss each of these in turn, as together they make clear why prompt ratification of this Convention by the United States is important to the American business community:

 

Leveling the playing field for U.S. businesses

 

This Convention will level the playing field for American business by holding foreign companies around the world – in places including Brazil, China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom – accountable for acts of corruption.

 

It is the first truly global anticorruption effort.  This Convention improves substantially upon other existing regional conventions that have attempted to address the issue of corruption.  The broadest of the four, the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, includes all thirty-five nations of the Western Hemisphere.  The strongest of the four, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, has 30 parties from Europe, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere.  However, it only covers bribery and not other forms of corruption such as interference in a judicial process, which also threaten the interests of U.S. business.  The Council of Europe Criminal Convention on Corruption has forty-five states parties, nearly all in Europe.  Africa attempted its own convention, but that convention has not yet entered into force.  Thus some of the major exporters – including China and India – and all of Africa have been omitted from the international anti-corruption legal regime until now. 

 

Thus, by harmonizing anti-corruption obligations at a higher standard than any before, and globalizing that standard for the first time, the United Nations Convention raises the bar overall and has the potential to level the playing field to a greater degree than any treaty or convention currently in existence.

 

The Convention includes mandatory preventive measures including calls to establish anti-corruption policies and bodies, mechanisms to prevent public sector corruption and transparency in public procurement, and measures relating to the judiciary, the private sector and to civil society.  The Convention also criminalizes corrupt practices including bribery and embezzlement of public funds and includes provisions to recover illegally-obtained assets and improve mutual legal assistance.

 

The United States already abides by the requirements spelled out in the Convention.  For example, the transnational bribery provisions are incorporated in the United States within the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.  Campaign finance laws, obstruction statutes and various state and federal laws incorporate the remainder of the mandatory provisions contained in the Convention.  As a result, no changes to U.S. law are required, which is a key point for the American business community.

 

No domestic costs or obligations imposed on the United States

 

The reservations, declarations and understandings contained in the Administration’s transmittal package, which accompanies the Convention, ensure that this Convention does not impose any new costs or obligations under U.S. law.  

 

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice indicated in her September 23, 2005, Letter of Submittal to the Senate that, “if the United States makes the proposed reservations, the existing body of federal and state law and regulations will be adequate to satisfy the Convention’s requirements for legislation, and, thus, further legislation will not be required for the United States to implement the Convention.”

 

The Administration has concluded that this Convention does not require any changes to U.S. law and is generally not self-executing, subject to the declarations, understandings and reservations that they have proposed.  In addition, nothing in the treaty creates a private right of action to permit foreigners to litigate corruption complaints in U.S. courts.  These statements confirm that the United States is already in compliance with its obligations under the Convention and has no further steps to take beyond ratification to implement this treaty in U.S. law. 

 

From our perspective, it is important that the Senate include the reservations, declarations and understandings as part of its advice and consent, as the Administration recommends in its transmittal package.  We particularly support the following declaration in its resolution, which is contained on page 21 of the Administration’s transmittal package:

 

“The United States declares that the provisions of the Convention (with the exception of Articles 44 and 46) are non-self-executing.  None of the provisions of the Convention creates a private right of action.”

 

With the necessary declarations, reservations and understandings in place, this Convention is costless from a domestic legal perspective, and squarely in the interests of the American business community. 

 

Effective and transparent implementation is imperative

 

Since this treaty raises the bar for other countries without imposing new obligations on us, the United States must focus its attention on implementation and monitoring.  The Administration must make certain that implementation of the Convention is transparent and honest, and that implementation actually focuses on rooting out corruption and is not used as a pretext to bar or harass American businesses.  We should also urge other countries to implement the Convention consistent with due process protections and fundamental rights.

 

In order to speak with the strongest and most credible voice to shape implementation of the Convention with these objectives in mind, prompt ratification by the Senate of this Convention is imperative.  The business community urges the Senate to ratify the Convention before December of this year, when the first Conference of State parties meets in Amman, Jordan.

 

That meeting will be the first time the parties to the Convention will have an opportunity to discuss implementation, monitoring, and technical and capacity-building assistance.

 

As countries incorporate the requirements of the Convention into domestic law, U.S. negotiators will be in a position – starting in December – to help ensure that implementation focuses on developing legal mechanisms to root out corruption as opposed to establishing new levers to harass American or other foreign competitors.  If we do not have a vote and voice at that meeting, our ability to achieve those objectives will be jeopardized.

 

This Convention will only be truly effective if it is implemented properly and subject to adequate monitoring.  By ratifying this Convention promptly and before the December Conference, the United States will be in the strongest position to guide implementation and monitoring efforts, which will be essential to its ultimate success.  Timing is important, and swift ratification is absolutely in the interests of the American business community.

 

Providing tools for reform-minded leaders

 

Finally, this Convention will benefit political systems and investment regimes worldwide by empowering reform elements with the tools they need to root out corruption and encourage transparent, stable investment climates.
   

 

Consultations and technical assistance from developed countries and institutions will benefit elements in developing countries interested in improving transparency and reducing corruption, thereby improving the climate for American and local businesses and aiding overall development.

 

For all of these reasons, the National Foreign Trade Council supports swift ratification by the Senate of this Convention subject to the declarations and understandings contained in the transmittal package as received from the Administration.