L/UNA Files
The Deputy Legal Adviser ( Tate ) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Administration ( Peurifoy )1
Subject: Use of Laissez-Passer by American Citizens Who Are United Nations Officials.
Problem:
Section 24 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations provides:
“The United Nations may issue United Nations laissez-passer to its officials. These laissez-passer shall be recognized and accepted as valid travel documents by the authorities of Members, taking into account the provisions of section 25.”*
Agreement has now been reached among the interested Offices and divisions of the Department with respect to the use of laissez-passer by United Nations officials who are foreign nationals. A question remains concerning the attitude of the United States toward use of laissez-passer by officials who are American citizens. Shall American citizens who are United Nations officials be permitted to travel abroad on United Nations business when they possess United Nations laissez-passer without being required to secure a United States passport?
[Page 54]Recommendation:
The United States should recognize the United Nations laissez-passer as a valid travel document for United Nations officials who are American citizens, without requiring them to secure a United States passport, but without prejudice to their right to request one. An understanding should be reached with the United Nations, under which the United States would be furnished appropriate information concerning the issuance of laissez-passer to American citizens and their travel abroad.
Your concurrence is requested, for purposes of (a) presentation to Congress and (b) further discussions with the United Nations.
Discussion:
The United Nations General Assembly approved the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations on February 13, 1946. In the letter transmitting the Convention to Congress for approval, the Department stated, inter alia, that the laissez-passer contemplated by section 24 was to be not “a substitute for a passport or other documentation of nationality”, but only “a certificate attesting to the United Nations affiliation of the bearer in respect to travel”. When the Senate passed S.J. Res. 136 (Tab A2) during the 80th Congress (a joint resolution approving the Convention), it incorporated into the resolution specific language construing section 24 as not “amending or modifying the existing or future provisions of United States law with respect to the requirement or issuance of passports or of other documents evidencing nationality”.
The Department’s understanding that the laissez-passer was not intended to be a substitute for a national passport or its equivalent was by no means clear from the drafting history of the Convention; indeed there has never been agreement in the Department on this point. The United Nations Secretariat has challenged consistently the idea that the laissez-passer authorized by the Convention would not be fully acceptable as a valid travel document. Numerous conferences have been held between United Nations and United States officials on this question, and it has been the subject of a continuing correspondence during the last two years. The United Nations continues to urge upon the United States approval of the Convention without qualification as to the laissez-passer provision.
[Page 55]Since the House of Representatives had not completed action on S.J. Res. 136 when the 80th Congress adjourned, it was necessary to resubmit the Convention to the new Congress. This was done recently, in a communication from the Department which recorded the history so far of the laissez-passer provision without making any recommendation to Congress on this point.
The Department is now faced with the necessity of taking a definite position on the laissez-passer, vis-à-vis the United Nations and vis-à-vis Congress. It is to be noted that under existing United States laws and regulations an American citizen can be authorized to travel abroad without a passport;† thus, even if the interpretation written into S.J. Res, 136 by the Senate should be retained by Congress, it would be possible for the United States to recognize the United Nations laissez-passer as an unqualifiedly valid travel document. Accordingly, whether or not the construction appearing in S.J. Res. 136 is retained, the Department has a question of policy to determine in regard to recognition of the laissez-passer.
It is generally agreed by the interested offices and divisions of the Department that, if the United States is required by its international legal obligations to permit the travel abroad on official business of the United Nations officials who are American citizens, there is no purpose in preventing the travel of such persons on United Nations laissez-passer rather than United States passports. In such circumstances the requirement of a United States passport cannot serve as a means of exit control but only to inform the United States as to which of its citizens have left the country. This purpose, however, can be served as well by requesting the United Nations to inform the United States when an American citizen is sent abroad on a laissez-passer. In an opinion of the Legal Adviser dated August 17, 1948 (Tab B3) it was concluded that the United States was obligated by the Charter of the United Nations to permit the travel abroad on official business of United Nations officials who are American citizens. Because, however, the Passport Division still questions the existence of such an obligation, it has objected to recognition of the United Nations laissez-passer so far as concerns American citizens.
- Sent through the Acting Director of the Office of United Nations Affairs (Sandifer).↩
- Section 25 deals with visas and travel facilities. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- Foreign Relations, 1947, vol. i, p. 48.↩
- The requirement that an American citizen obtain a passport to travel abroad is an emergency regulation which by statute can be imposed only during a state of war or national emergency. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- Tab 3 is not printed.↩