printable banner

U.S. Department of State - Great Seal

U.S. Department of State

Diplomacy in Action

21. Second Report on International Extradition Submitted to Congress Pursuant to Section 3203 of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000 as enacted in the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2001, Public Law 106-246 Relating to Plan Columbia, July 13,


Share


SECOND REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION
SUBMITTED TO THE CONGRESS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 3203
OF THE EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL ACT, 2000,
AS ENACTED IN THE
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001,
PUBLIC LAW 106-246

RELATED TO PLAN COLOMBIA

REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 3203 OF THE EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL ACT, 2000, AS ENACTED IN PUBLIC LAW 106-246

This report is submitted by the Secretary of State to the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and the Committee on International Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives in response to the requirements of section 3203 of Title III, Chapter 2 of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000, as enacted in the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2001, Public Law 106-246. Title III of the Emergency Supplemental Act appropriates funds for the foreign assistance package known as "Plan Colombia." The text of section 3203 is attached as Tab A.

As required by section 3203(a)(1), this Report begins with factual information about persons whose extradition has been requested from each of the following ten countries that are receiving counternarcotics assistance from the United States under Plan Colombia: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela. As discussed further below, the Office of International Affairs of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice assembled this data at the request of the State Department.

As required by sections 3203(a)(2) and 3203(a)(3), this Report then discusses specific aspects of these ten countries' cooperation with the United States in the area of international extradition. Because sections 3203(a)(2) and 3203(a)(3) are linked in substance, they are discussed together below. The information in the discussion of these sections reflects the input of the Department of Justice.

Response to Section 3203(a)(1) - Persons Sought for Extradition

General Discussion

The Justice Department prepared the statistical tables at Tab B based on its database of international extradition requests made to Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela. In preparing this information, the Justice Department used statistics for the countries in question from January 1 to June 30, 2001. This six-month period provides information compiled since the first report to Congress on international extradition required by section 3203 of the Emergency Supplemental Act, which the Department submitted to Congress on January 17, 2001, and provided data up to and including December 31, 2000.

The statistical tables reflect U.S. extradition requests for fugitives sought for narcotics offenses as well as for other crimes, and divide the information to reflect each category. The Justice Department has not provided the names of fugitives still at large out of concern that disclosure could compromise the possibility of a fugitive's being apprehended. In addition to this general concern, in some cases disclosure could endanger the safety of law enforcement personnel or sources, and in some cases there may be court orders prohibiting such disclosure. Because of these constraints, the first chart in Tab B provides aggregate statistics for those fugitives still at large without providing the names of the individual fugitives. The second chart in Tab B lists the names of the fugitives detained since January 1, 2001, as well as the crimes for which they were detained, the dates they were arrested, and the countries that have detained them. The third chart in Tab B lists the names of the fugitives surrendered since January 1, 2001, the countries that surrendered the fugitives, the crimes for which the fugitives were extradited to the United States, and the date the fugitives were surrendered to the United States.

The data in Tab B is accurate based on information available to the Departments of Justice and State as of June 30, 2001, the end of the latest period for which data is available. In this connection, section 3203 requires reports to Congress every six months during the period that Plan Colombia resources are made available. The Department of State's subsequent reports will correct or update the information set forth in this report as new information becomes available.

Response to Sections 3203(a)(2) and 3203(a)(3) - Efforts to Extradite to the United States, Analysis of Obstacles to Extradition, and Steps Taken to Overcome these Obstacles

General Discussion

The following general overview puts into context the discussion that follows about the U.S. Government's experiences in international extradition with Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela.

The United States has extradition treaties in force with each of the ten countries listed above. For nine of these countries, outgoing extradition requests from the United States are acted upon under the bilateral extradition treaties. The processing of U.S. extradition requests to Colombia, however, is conducted under that country's national extradition law. The Government of Colombia, unlike the U.S. Government, can extradite fugitives under its domestic law without reference to a treaty, and Colombia extradites fugitives to the United States on that basis.

The U.S. Government's international extradition relationships with some of these countries are notably busier than with others. This disparity in experiences is reflected both in the charts at Tab B in response to section 3203(a)(1) and in the country-by-country discussions below.

All of the countries that are the subject of this report are cooperating with the United States in good faith, whether under a bilateral extradition treaty or under their domestic extradition law.

As in any extradition relationship, there are reasons why not all extradition requests (both to and from the United States) have been granted. Older extradition treaties that need to be updated govern many of the U.S. Government's relationships with countries in the region. The United States has embarked on an ambitious program of modernizing many of the older bilateral extradition treaties, particularly with countries with which there is, or is expected, a significant law enforcement need to carry out extraditions. In October 1998, as part of the largest group of law enforcement treaties ever heard at once, the U.S. Senate considered and approved 18 extradition treaties, 16 of which were completely new treaties and two of which were protocols to existing treaties. In October 2000 the U.S. Senate considered and approved completely new extradition treaties with four additional countries.

Over time, the United States will seek to update all of the bilateral treaty relationships in the region. With respect to the ten countries covered under this report, the United States has brought into force new modern extradition treaties with Bolivia and with Trinidad and Tobago and has nearly completed negotiating a new extradition treaty with Peru. New treaties with modern features, including extradition of nationals, definition of extraditable offenses in terms of dual criminality, and provisional arrest of fugitives, will strengthen the ability of the United States to have persons returned to face criminal charges.

The United States as a matter of policy draws no distinction between nationals and non-nationals in extradition. One of the U.S. Government's key negotiating priorities in determining new extradition treaty negotiations is to identify countries that are willing to extradite their nationals and update those treaty relationships as expeditiously as possible. In the last five years, the United States has updated its treaties in this hemisphere with Bolivia, Argentina, and Paraguay after those countries agreed to include a treaty clause enabling the extradition of nationals under some or all circumstances. The United States also benefits from Colombia's December 1997 constitutional amendment to permit extraditing its nationals to the United States under its domestic law. Trinidad and Tobago has long extradited its nationals under extradition treaties applicable between the United States and that country. The U.S. Government intends to continue and expand this trend. Over time, the Departments of State and Justice would also like to update the treaties with Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela, particularly when those countries are prepared to extradite their nationals. Peru and El Salvador have already indicated a willingness to pursue treaties that provide for extradition of nationals.

The Departments of Justice and State have been pursuing vigorous, across-the-board efforts to convince individual countries and the world community that refusal of extradition on the ground of nationality is no longer appropriate, given the ease of flight and the increasingly transnational nature of crime. In addition to pursuing this issue vigorously in treaty negotiations, U.S. diplomats and U.S. law enforcement officials have made eliminating restrictions on the extradition of nationals a high priority in bilateral dialogues with other countries. These efforts have already had notable successes, beginning to achieve what the United States hopes will be an overall reversal of a well-entrenched and long-standing tradition in many countries, often enshrined in constitutions and national law.

Apart from the issue of extradition of nationals, however, it bears noting that not every request for extradition results in a fugitive being delivered to the requesting country. Frequently fugitives are not returned for very legitimate reasons that are grounded in international extradition law and practice. This is true both for requests to and from the United States.

For example, sometimes nations seeking extradition (including the United States) do not have recent specific information on where a fugitive is located and therefore might make multiple contingency requests for provisional arrest and extradition. In other cases, fugitives learn from the press or third parties they are being sought and flee or go into hiding. Extradition treaties themselves provide specific bases on which extraditions can be delayed or denied. The obligation to extradite under a bilateral extradition treaty is not absolute and protections are built in to accommodate both U.S. and foreign legal and policy interests. While the exact terms of such exceptions result from country-specific negotiations and thus vary somewhat among the treaties, legitimate limitations endorsed by the United States may include requirements that the conduct be criminalized in the requested state in addition to the requesting state, that the offenses be of a sufficiently serious character in both countries, and that evidence presented be sufficient to meet the relevant treaty's provisions or the constitutional or other legal requirements for detention of persons in the requested state. In some cases, including in the courts of the United States, extradition requests lead to lengthy judicial proceedings and challenges spanning years.

Moreover, most of the U.S. Government's modern treaties have provisions where the requested state can deny extradition absent assurances regarding the imposition of the death penalty, or if the crime in question is a political or military offense, or if extradition would present double jeopardy problems for the requested state. Many treaty relationships have provisions limiting the obligation to extradite where the statute of limitations of the requested state has run for the conduct in question. Finally, the nation where a fugitive is located is typically under no obligation to interrupt its own criminal prosecution of the same fugitive to accommodate a request for extradition from another nation, a principle that is recognized in all of the U.S. Government's modern extradition treaties.

The United States is also working with other countries in the hemisphere, including the ten countries that are the subject of this report, to promote judicial reform and respect for the rule of law. This includes extensive training programs for judges, prosecutors, and police; encouragement of strong professional ethics standards; and reform of criminal justice laws and procedures. These steps will help combat the potential for corruption and instill public confidence in the integrity of the courts of justice. As these reforms take root, the extradition of fugitives -- along with other aspects of the criminal justice systems -- should become more transparent and efficient.

As a result of the Summits of the Americas and the initiation of regular meetings among justice ministers of the hemisphere, the 34 democratic countries of the Western Hemisphere are also engaged in a multilateral effort to improve extradition practice and procedures. At the March 1999 Justice Ministerial in Lima, Peru, the ministers endorsed a U.S. proposal to develop extradition "checklists," glossaries of commonly used legal terms, and other instruments to provide guidance on extradition procedures that would help eliminate errors in the preparation of documents that have led in the past to the denial of extraditions that are requested. A working group has been formed at the Organization of American States to identify contact points in individual governments on extradition and to gather the necessary documentation. The March 2000 Justice Ministerial in San Jose, Costa Rica, provided an occasion for the ministers to reaffirm their interest in improving extradition practice and to bring judges into the discussion as well. The Caribbean Justice Ministerial, held on June 12 and 13, 2000, also provided an opportunity for the U.S. and ministers from the Caribbean countries to discuss extradition. There is a clear understanding by all countries slated to benefit from assistance under Plan Colombia, as reflected in commitments through the Summit of the Americas and Justice Ministerials, of the need to develop and maintain effective domestic criminal justice systems and effective systems of international cooperation in law enforcement.
Country-by-Country Analysis

With this background, the following discussion examines more specifically U.S. extradition relationships with the ten countries that are covered by this report.

BOLIVIA

A new extradition treaty was signed in 1995 and entered into force in 1996. It mandates the extradition of nationals for most serious offenses, including drug trafficking. The negotiation of this modern treaty to replace an outdated treaty from 1900 represented a major step toward overcoming obstacles to extradition. There are no serious legal obstacles in Bolivian law that impede the extradition of persons sought by U.S. authorities. The Bolivian Government's good faith efforts to extradite fugitives to the United States are demonstrated by its surrender of two fugitives since January 1998 and its detention of five others.

BRAZIL

Brazil cooperates with the United States in the extradition of non-Brazilians. The Brazilian Constitution, however, prohibits the extradition of Brazilian nationals. The U.S.-Brazil extradition treaty, which was signed in 1961 and entered into force in 1964, includes a broad list of extraditable offenses, with the notable exception of money laundering. Brazil, however, is a party to the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (the 1988 UN Drug Convention), through which drug-related money laundering is deemed to be included as an extraditable offense under the bilateral treaty. While the United States is unable to obtain the extradition of Brazilian citizens, Brazil's good faith efforts to cooperate are demonstrated by its extradition of two non-citizen fugitives and detention of six others since January 1998, including the detention of one fugitive in the first half of 2001. The Departments of Justice and State have continued the dialogue with the Government of Brazil on important issues, including the extradition of nationals, in an effort to bring fugitives to justice.

COLOMBIA

Over the last two decades, the U.S.-Colombian extradition relationship has experienced both times of frustration and periods of extraordinary cooperation. At this time, the level of cooperation in extradition matters is as high as ever and is particularly noteworthy in view of the complex political and public security concerns facing the Colombian authorities. Moreover, this cooperation has come at an enormous cost to the Colombian government, a large number of whose police, prosecutors, and judges, and their families, have been killed, injured, or threatened by members of drug trafficking organizations. Nonetheless, the number of fugitives extradited and currently detained at the request of the United States is very high and many of this new group of "extraditables" have been charged in the United States as a result of bilateral U.S.-Colombian criminal investigations. This development is particularly significant because of the prominent role of many of these fugitives in international criminal activities, including illegal narcotics trafficking.

For the purpose of background, a new U.S.-Colombia extradition treaty, signed in 1979, entered into force in 1982. It mandated the extradition of nationals for narcotics trafficking and other transnational crimes. From 1982 through 1990, the Colombian Government extradited a number of Colombian drug traffickers to the United States, at first pursuant to the treaty (which was ruled invalid under Colombian law by the Colombian Supreme Court in 1986), and afterward pursuant to executive decree. In July 1991, however, a new Colombian Constitution, which expressly prohibited the extradition of Colombian nationals by birth, entered into force. Thereafter, extradition of non-Colombians continued pursuant to Colombian domestic law.

On December 17, 1997, Colombia enacted a constitutional amendment to allow for the extradition of nationals. This change represented a vital step by the Colombian Government to overcome the most significant barrier to extraditing criminals from Colombia, and ushered in a new era of bilateral cooperation on extradition matters.

The number of fugitives arrested for extradition and surrendered to the United States amply demonstrates Colombia's good faith efforts to ensure that criminals are brought to justice in the United States. Since the last report, Colombia has arrested 18 fugitives for extradition at the United States' request and has surrendered seven persons, most of whom are wanted on narcotics-related charges. Since 1998, the Government of Colombia has arrested a total of 76 persons and has extradited a total of 28 fugitives. Nevertheless, some obstacles to extradition remain. For example, the constitutional amendment expressly applies only to crimes committed after its effective date, thereby continuing to bar extradition of a number of drug traffickers for crimes committed before December 1997. In addition, the Colombian domestic extradition law authorizes extradition only for a limited scope of offenses. As a result, the United States is unable to obtain the extradition of persons, regardless of their nationality, for a number of serious offenses, including certain violent and financial crimes for which the minimum penalty under Colombian law may be less than four years imprisonment. The Departments of Justice and State continue in discussion with the Colombian Government in an effort to overcome obstacles to and otherwise facilitate extradition.

COSTA RICA

The current U.S.-Costa Rican extradition treaty, signed in 1982, entered into force in 1991, and, at this time, bilateral extradition relations are good, despite a Costa Rican constitutional prohibition against the extradition of its nationals. Since the last report, Costa Rica has surrendered three fugitives to the United States, including two for drug trafficking offenses. The Departments of Justice and State will continue to engage the Government of Costa Rica on important issues to ensure that fugitives are brought to justice.


ECUADOR

The current extradition treaty between the United States and Ecuador was signed in 1872, and supplemented in 1939. It remains in serious need of updating. The current extradition treaty does not provide for the mandatory extradition of nationals, contains a very limited list of extraditable crimes, and does not authorize the provisional arrest of fleeing fugitives prior to the presentation of a fully documented formal extradition request. Narcotics trafficking and related money laundering are covered as extraditable offenses under the 1939 supplementary treaty between the United States and Ecuador and by operation of the 1988 UN Drug Convention, to which both the United States and Ecuador are parties.

Ecuador has a constitutional prohibition against the extradition of its citizens. In recent years, representatives of the Departments of Justice and State have traveled to Ecuador for preliminary talks on extradition issues and to offer appropriate assistance. However, the negotiation of a new extradition treaty depends on whether Ecuador is ready to amend its Constitution to permit the extradition of Ecuadorian citizens. Despite difficulties in obtaining the extradition of fugitives from Ecuador, Ecuadorian authorities have been cooperative, when possible, in arranging for the deportation or expulsion of non-Ecuadorians to the United States or to third countries from where they can be extradited.

EL SALVADOR

In July 2000, El Salvador took a very important step to remove a serious obstacle to extradition by enacting a constitutional amendment to permit the extradition of Salvadoran nationals. The constitutional change has been an important policy goal of the Departments of Justice and State over the past several years. At this time, there are a number of fugitives who are wanted in the United States for murder and other serious offenses and are believed to be living in El Salvador but who, to date, have enjoyed impunity because of their Salvadoran nationality.

The constitutional amendment, as enacted, allows for the extradition of Salvadoran nationals when expressly provided for by an extradition treaty. Because the current U.S.-El Salvador extradition treaty, which was signed in 1911, does not contain an affirmative obligation for either party to extradite its nationals, a new treaty must be negotiated, ratified, and enter into force before the United States can seek the extradition of a Salvadoran national. The Departments of Justice and State are hoping to hold negotiations later in 2001.


PANAMA

The current extradition treaty between the United States and Panama was signed in 1904, and the Panamanian Constitution prohibits the extradition of Panamanian nationals. Although the 1904 treaty contains a limited list of extraditable offenses, Panama is a party to the 1988 UN Drug Convention, through which narcotics trafficking and related money laundering are deemed to be included as extraditable offenses under the bilateral extradition treaty.

Despite its bar to extradition of nationals and an old treaty, Panama has continually demonstrated good faith efforts to surrender fugitives to the United States. Most of all, Panama has shown a willingness on numerous occasions to make use of legal alternatives to extradition (which are not reflected on the appended charts) in order to effect the return of non-Panamanians to the United States to face trial. The Departments of Justice and State have continued to engage the Government of Panama on important issues to ensure that fugitives are brought to justice.

PERU

Peru's good faith efforts to extradite fugitives to the United States are demonstrated by the surrender of two persons to the United States since January 1998. Recognizing the need to update the current extradition treaty, which was signed in 1899, the United States and Peru have substantially completed the negotiation of a new treaty that would obligate the parties to extradite persons for a broad range of offenses, regardless of their nationality. The United States hopes to complete the negotiations as soon as possible.

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

The United States enjoys an excellent law enforcement relationship with Trinidad and Tobago, which plays a leadership role in regional and multilateral organizations and initiatives. Trinidad and Tobago has been very cooperative in extradition matters and has exhibited the political will to expeditiously extradite several large-scale narcotics traffickers and murderers in the past few years. On November 29, 1999, a new extradition treaty came into force between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago. The new treaty provides for the extradition of nationals and extradition for all offenses that are punishable by more than a year in prison. No problems have yet been identified in the period that the new treaty has been in effect. However, should any problems arise, it is expected that they would be resolved quickly through consultation.

VENEZUELA

The current extradition treaty between the United States and Venezuela was signed in 1922. The treaty contains a limited list of extraditable offenses, and narcotics trafficking is not one of the listed offenses. Venezuela is a party to the 1988 UN Drug Convention, and by the terms of the Convention narcotics trafficking and related money laundering are deemed extraditable under the bilateral extradition treaty. Venezuela's 1999 Constitution expressly prohibits the extradition of Venezuelan nationals. Previously, Venezuela only had a statutory bar to the extradition of nationals. Despite this obstacle, Venezuela has demonstrated good faith in extraditing non-Venezuelans to the United States. On other occasions, the Venezuelan authorities have arranged for the deportation or expulsion of non-citizens to stand trial in the United States.
Tab A


Excerpt from the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000,
as enacted in the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2001, Public Law 106-246

Section 3203. Report on Extradition of Narcotics Traffickers.—

  1. Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this title, and every 6 months thereafter, during the period Plan Colombia resources are made available, the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and the Committee on International Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report setting forth—
  1. a list of the persons whose extradition has been requested from any country receiving counternarcotics assistance from the United States, indicating those persons who— (A) have been surrendered to the custody of United States authorities; (B) have been detained by the authorities and who are being processed for extradition; (C) have been detained by the authorities and who are not yet being processed for extradition; or (D) are at large;
  1. a determination whether authorities of each country receiving counternarcotics assistance from the United States are making good faith efforts to ensure the prompt extradition of each of the persons sought by United States authorities; and
  1. an analysis of— (A) any legal obstacles in the laws of each country receiving counternarcotics assistance from the United States regarding prompt extradition of persons sought by United States authorities; and (B) the steps taken by authorities of the United States and the authorities of each country receiving counternarcotics assistance from the United States to overcome such obstacles.


Tab B

PLAN COLOMBIA:

Summary of Extradition Information
(January 1, 2001, to June 30, 2001)

COUNTRY

REQUESTS MADE SINCE JANUARY 1, 2001

DETAINED

SURRENDERED

Narcotics Charges
Non-Narcotics
Charges

Bolivia

0

0

0

0


Brazil
0

2

1
0

Colombia
16

8

18
7

Costa Rica
2

2

0
3

Ecuador
0

0

0
0

El Salvador
0

0

0
0

Panama
0

1

0
0

Peru
2

1

0
0

Trinidad and Tobago
0

0

0
0

Venezuela
5

0

0
0

TOTAL
25

14

19
10


Fugitives Detained Since January 1, 2001


FUGITIVE NAME


CRIME

ARREST DATE

COUNTRY

Drummer, Harry


Fraud, Weapons

01-09-2001

Brazil

Brito Giraldo, Jair


Narcotics

01-18-2001

Colombia

Brito Giraldo, Luis Evelio


Narcotics

01-18-2001

Colombia

Lujan, German


Narcotics

01-18-2001

Colombia

Marin, Maria Elena


Narcotics

01-18-2001

Colombia

Munoz Marulanda, Fran Geovany


Narcotics

01-18-2001

Colombia

Arritola, Jesus


Narcotics

01-22-2001

Colombia

Gomez, Marino


Narcotics

02-27-2001

Colombia

Montoya Montoya, Ramiro


Narcotics

02-27-2001

Colombia

Trujillo Hoyos, Tulio


Narcotics

03-23-2001

Colombia

Martinez, Jose Alberto


Narcotics

03-27-2001

Colombia

Diaz Urzola, Miguel Augusto


Narcotics

05-10-2001

Colombia

Fugitives Detained Since January 1, 2001 (cont.)


FUGITIVE NAME


CRIME

ARREST DATE

COUNTRY

Quintero Morales, Alfonso


Narcotics

05-10-2001

Colombia

Reinosa Castrillon, Orlando


Narcotics

06-15-2001

Colombia

Bravo, Juan Luis

Kidnapping


06-20-2001

Colombia

Herrera-Iles, Gerardo


Kidnapping

06-20-2001

Colombia

Alvarado-Herrera, Cristobal


Kidnapping

06-21-2001

Colombia

Alvarez-Iles, Jose del Carmen


Kidnapping

06-21-2001

Colombia

Sandoval, Maria Gladys


Narcotics

06-22-2001

Colombia


Fugitives Surrendered Since January 1, 2001


FUGITIVE NAME

CRIME

SURRENDER DATE

COUNTRY

Tamayo, Carlos Omar


Narcotics

01-12-2001

Colombia

Morales, Jorge Orlando


Narcotics

02-01-2001

Colombia

Moreno Uribe, Horacio de Jesus


Money Laundering

02-09-2001

Colombia

Gomez Moreno, Hernan Abelardo


Narcotics, Money Laundering

03-30-2001

Colombia

Gomez Maya, Gustavo Aldolfo

Narcotics

04-30-2001

Colombia


Gallego, Alberto de Jesus


Narcotics, Money Laundering

05-15-2001

Colombia

Barrera Garces, Carlos David


Narcotics

05-21-2001

Colombia

Garcia, Jose Antonio


Narcotics

03-26-2001

Costa Rica

Young, Raymond David


Fraud

04-11-2001

Costa Rica

Freeman, William Warren


Narcotics

05-09-2001

Costa Rica



Back to Top
Sign-in

Do you already have an account on one of these sites? Click the logo to sign in and create your own customized State Department page. Want to learn more? Check out our FAQ!

OpenID is a service that allows you to sign in to many different websites using a single identity. Find out more about OpenID and how to get an OpenID-enabled account.