Common use of NATO SOFA Clause in Contracts

NATO SOFA. It therefore constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects. In this context, Sweden recalls its reservation of November 13, 1996, regarding jurisdiction in the receiving State [see footnote 10]. “Further regarding Article XI. The references to Russian national legislation aim to make the Partnership for Peace Agreement subject to national Russian legislation. The Russian Statement would seem to seek to modify the legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian Federation in respect of Article XI NATO SOFA. It thus constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects. “The Statement also presumes certified translation into the Russian language of documents and materials appended to them. This would constitute an additional obligation for the other Parties to the Partnership for Peace Agreement and would seem to seek to modify the legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian Federation. It thus constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects. “The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Russian Federation to the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their Forces and the Additional Protocol thereto. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Partnership for Peace Agreement and the Additional Protocol thereto between the Russian Federation and Sweden, as modified by the reservation made by Sweden. The Partnership for Peace Agreement and the Additional Protocol thereto enters into force between the Russian Federation and Sweden without the Russian Federation benefiting from its reservation. “The Embassy of Sweden avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the United States Department of State the assurances of its highest consideration.” From the United States, received September 12, 2008: “The Government of the United States of America has examined the statement submitted by the Russian Federation with its instrument of ratification on August 28, 2007, concerning the 1995 Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces (hereinafter the PfP SOFA) and the Additional Protocol thereto. In its statement, the Russian Federation states that it sets forth its understanding of the provisions of the Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces, of June 19, 1951 (hereinafter the Agreement). The Government of the United States considers some of the ‘understandings’ acceptable. The United States, however, considers some of the ‘understandings’ to be reservations that purport to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the PfP SOFA, and others to purport to create additional obligations for the Parties beyond those explicitly contained in the PfP SOFA. “The Government of the United States responds to each of the ‘understandings’ contained in the statement submitted by the Russian Federation as follows:

NATO SOFA. It therefore constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects. In this context, Sweden recalls its reservation of November 13, 1996, regarding jurisdiction in The United Kingdom considers the receiving State [see footnote 10]. “Further regarding Article XI. The references to Russian national legislation aim to make the Partnership for Peace Agreement subject to national Russian legislation. The Russian Statement would seem to seek statements purport to modify the legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian Federation in respect of Article XI of the NATO SOFASOFA which applies to the Russian Federation by virtue of Article I of the Partnership for Peace Agreement. They are accordingly reservations. The United Kingdom is particularly concerned by the numerous references to national legislation, the intention not to treat official documents under official seal as inviolable and the purported creation of new obligations for the other Parties to the Partnership for Peace Agreement. It thus constitutes a reservation accordingly objects to which Sweden objectsthese reservations. “Certified Translations. The Statement also presumes certified translation into the Russian language of documents and materials appended to them. This statement would constitute create an additional obligation for the other Parties to the Partnership for Peace Agreement and would seem without their consent in respect of the application of the NATO SOFA which applies to seek the Russian Federation by virtue of Article I of the Partnership for Peace Agreement. The United Kingdom accordingly considers that this statement purports to modify the legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian FederationAgreement. It thus constitutes is therefore a reservation to which Sweden objectsreservation. “The Government of Sweden therefore United Kingdom objects to it on the aforesaid reservations made by basis that it purports to create an obligation for the Russian Federation to the Agreement among the States other Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding Agreement. “The United Kingdom is of the Status view that the cumulative effect of their Forces the reservations is to undermine the integrity of the Partnership for Peace Agreement and also the Additional Protocol theretoNATO SOFA as it is applied by virtue of Article I of the Partnership for Peace Agreement. This objection shall not preclude The United Kingdom considers that the entry into force of the Partnership for Peace Agreement between itself and the Additional Protocol thereto between the Russian Federation and Sweden, as modified by is precluded. Accordingly the reservation made by Sweden. The Partnership for Peace Agreement does not apply between the United Kingdom and the Additional Protocol thereto enters into force between the Russian Federation and Sweden without the Russian Federation benefiting from its reservation. Federation.” From Lithuania, received September 4, 2008: “The Embassy Ministry of Sweden avails itself Foreign Affairs of this opportunity to renew the Republic of Lithuania presents its compliments to the United States Department of State and, whereas the assurances of its highest consideration.” From the United States, received September 12, 2008: “The Government of the United States of America has examined is depositary to the statement submitted by the Russian Federation with its instrument of ratification on August 28, 2007, concerning the 1995 Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of their Their Forces (hereinafter the PfP SOFA) and the Additional Protocol thereto. In its statementto the Agreement, done in Brussels on 19 June 1995, has the honour to transmit the following Statement of the Republic of Lithuania concerning the Statement of the Russian Federation states that it sets forth its understanding as of the provisions 28 August 2007 made upon ratification of the Agreement between and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement: ‘The Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, complying with paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 20 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (official gazette Valstybės žinios, 2002, No 13-480), having regard to the Statement of the Russian Federation as of 28 August 2007 made upon ratification of the Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of Their Forces, of June 19, 1951 Forces (hereinafter referred to as the ‘PfP Agreement). The Government ’) and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Statement of the United States considers some of the ‘understandings’ acceptable. The United StatesRussian Federation’), however, considers some of the ‘understandings’ to be reservations that purport to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the PfP SOFA, and others to purport to create additional obligations for the Parties beyond those explicitly contained in the PfP SOFA. “The Government of the United States responds to each of the ‘understandings’ contained in the statement submitted by the Russian Federation as followshereby states that: