125.225H3/12–2249: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Czechoslovakia
1247. Dept shares ur view Emb shld continue press Hvasta case ur 1885 Dec. 22 and feels concern implications position taken by Hajdu ur 1879 Dec. 21.1 If his statements shld prove to be personal and impromptu response to ur approach, it may be advisable avoid raising issue principle at this time lest it provide fruitless controversy and cause immed rigidity Czech position. If Hajdu’s assertions, however, shld represent considered conclusion Czech Govt to deny aliens legal rights guaranteed under laws civilized countries, believe US must firmly challenge this stand at most advantageous time.
Dept’s decision what action, over and above ur continued representations, shld be taken in Hvasta case will depend to considerable extent on whether or not anticipated US action in Vogeler case2 has significant effect on attitude of satellite govts generally in treatment of US nationals. We wld hope effect might be favorable but if not we shall be obliged to consider specific retaliatory action in other cases such as that of Hvasta and possibly Fields. Further exploration of Czech attitude on legal principles in question wld be primarily for purpose of laying legal groundwork for such specific retaliatory action.
If Czech auths shld maintain as legal principles fon govt has no right to info on charges against its citizens under arrest or detention and no right of access to such prisoners, US wld have strong grounds for claiming this contrary to accepted standards of internatl practice and principles internatl law. Denial of justice considered to include withholding info on charges and right of prisoner to communicate with Consul of his country if he so requests. On basis such principles there have been awards against countries for long periods of detention incommunicado without info as to purpose detention or for unwarranted detention. From standpoint reciprocal legal treatment, it may be noted system of incommunicado not recognized in Amer jurisprudence [Page 433] and US has long maintained Amer Consul shld be permitted to visit Amer citizen imprisoned in fon country.
Ur statements to Hajdu generally correct re points US judicial practice ur 1879. Criminal trial US Federal Courts preceded by FBI investigation and grand jury indictment. Investigation and process of finding indictment secret altho statement of indictment containing all charges available to accused is public and therefore open to reps fon govt. Transcript of proceedings available as public document immed conclusion trial and may be obtained by reps fon govt.
- In his telegram 1879, December 21, from Praha, not printed, Ambassador Briggs reported on the oral assertion by Czechoslovak Deputy Assistant Foreign Minister Hajdů that a foreign government enjoyed no right to information regarding the charges against one of its nationals while the case was under investigation by Czechoslovak authorities nor did a foreign government have any right of access to a prisoner (860H.00/12–2149). In his telegram 1885, December 22, not printed, Briggs observed that in view of Hajdů’s position, the Embassy’s ability to protect American citizens in Czechoslovakia approached nil unless the Department was prepared to undertake some retaliatory action such as halting the travel of American citizens to Czechoslovakia (125.225H3/12–2249).↩
- Regarding the case of Robert Vogeler, an American citizen arrested in Hungary and held incommunicado there, see editorial note, p. 482.↩