Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

With respect to Japanese taxes, present or future, which are not explicitly mentioned in this Article and which could prove to be a significant and easily identifiable relationship to the gross price of revenues for materials, supplies, equipment and services provided by, or for the final use of, the Armed Forces of the United States, the two governments agree on a procedure, with a view to granting such an exemption or exemption, which is compatible with the purposes. this article. 10. Disputes arising out of contracts relating to the acquisition of materiel, supplies, equipment, services and manpower by or for the Armed Forces of the United States, which are not resolved by the parties to the contract in question, may be submitted to the Joint Commission for conciliation, provided that the provisions of this paragraph do not affect the right of the parties to take civil action. 3. Japan has also helped offset the costs of deploying US forces to Japan, including through a special measures agreement and the facility implementation programme. (b) The arbitrator referred to in point (a) shall be chosen by mutual agreement between the two Governments from among the nationals of Japan who hold or have held a high judicial office. In addition, some peculiarities of the agreement create domains with perceived privileges for American soldiers. For example, because SOFA exempts most U.S. military personnel from Japanese visa and passport legislation, previous incidents have occurred, where U.S. military personnel were transferred to the U.S. before being indicted in Japanese courts.

In addition, the agreement requires that when a U.S. service member is suspected of a crime but is not captured outside a base by Japanese authorities, U.S. authorities retain custody until acceptance of the service is formally charged by the Japanese. [2] Although the agreement also requires the United States to cooperate with Japanese authorities in investigations,[3] Japanese authorities often claim that they still do not have regular access to interrogate or question the United States. Soldiers, making it more difficult for Japanese prosecutors to prepare cases for indictment. [4] [5] This is compounded by the singularity of Japanese pre-indictment interrogations, which focus on confession as a precondition for indictment, often without a lawyer[6] and can last up to 23 days. [7] Given the difference between this interrogation system and the system in the United States, the United States has argued that the extraterritoriality granted to its military members under the SOFA is necessary to grant them the same rights as those of the U.S. criminal justice system. . . .

Comments are closed.