United States v. Enger
Decision Date | 25 August 1978 |
Docket Number | Crim. No. 78-149. |
Citation | 472 F. Supp. 490 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Valdik Aleksandrovich ENGER and Rudolf Petrovich Chernyayev, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Robert J. Del Tufo, U. S. Atty., Edward J. Plaza, Asst. U. S. Atty., Newark, N. J., for plaintiff.
Martin Popper, Donald N. Ruby, Wolf, Popper, Ross, Wolf & Jones, New York City, for defendants.
The defendants, citizens of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, are charged in a three-count indictment with conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. ?? 793(g) and 793(a) and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C. ?? 793(b) and 2.1 They are now before the court on a variety of motions, which I shall consider in the order in which they are raised by the defendants' memorandum of law.
The defendants have moved for dismissal of the indictment, contending they are entitled to the protection of diplomatic immunity.
The factual predicate for the defendants' claim of immunity rests primarily on letters submitted to the court on behalf of the defendants by the U.S.S.R. Ambassador to the United States, Hon. Anatoly F. Dobrynin, and Hon. Erik Suy, Legal Counsel to the United Nations. Defendants themselves have filed no affidavits in their own name. Hence there are here lacking facts explaining why their United Nations vocations required their presence in New Jersey, or a contention by the defendants that they were not in New Jersey at the times alleged by the United States.
Ambassador Dobrynin's letters, attached as Exhibit A to the defendants' notice of motion, are formal claims of immunity by the U.S.S.R. An identical claim of immunity is made for each of the defendants. The following is the complete text of each letter:
The Dobrynin letters do not contend that either defendant is, or at any material time was, duly designated by the U.S.S.R. to serve as its representative to the United Nations, that either is or was on the staff of the U.S.S.R. delegation to the United Nations, or that either ever performed or was ever assigned to perform any diplomatic duties on behalf of the U.S.S.R. in its relations with the United States (or any other government) while residing in this country. Instead, the letters do not go beyond stating that the defendants, from the time of their separate arrivals in the United States from the U.S.S.R., have been "attached to the Secretariat of the United Nations," while retaining their diplomatic ranks as conferred on them by their government.
The nature of their employment with the United Nations is set forth in the letter of The Legal Counsel to the United Nations, dated June 23, 1978, attached as Exhibit B to the defendants' notice of motion. The following is the full text of Mr. Suy's letter:
The attachments to the Suy letter indicate that the responsibilities of the defendants, in their employment with the United Nations, include the following.
The defendant Enger is a Political Affairs Officer attached to the Unit for Coordination and Political Information, Office of the Undersecretary General for Political Information. The responsibilities of the Department of Political and Security Counsel Affairs are described, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Von Dardel v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
...§ 461 (Tent. Draft No. 4, 1983). The concept was a part of the ancient civilizations of China, India and Egypt, United States v. Enger, 472 F.Supp. 490, 504 (D.N.J.1978). The present day consensus of the international community on the protection afforded diplomats has been codified in a num......
-
In re Luis-Rodriguez
...denied, 454 U.S. 1144 (1982); United States v. Heine, 151 F.2d 813 (2d Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 328 U.S. 833 (1946); United States v. Enger, 472 F. Supp. 490 (D.N.J. 1978). The respondent argues strenuously that absent a conclusive showing that he was engaged in activities aimed at procuri......
-
In re Luis-Rodriguez
...denied, 454 U.S. 1144 (1982); United States v. Heine, 151 F.2d 813 (2d Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 328 U.S. 833 (1946); United States v. Enger, 472 F. Supp. 490 (D.N.J. 1978). The respondent argues strenuously that absent a conclusive showing that he was engaged in activities aimed at procuri......
-
Doe v. Qi
...immunity to local officials from foreign governments that are not in the United States on diplomatic missions. See United States v. Enger, 472 F.Supp. 490, 506 (D.N.J.1978) ("full privileges and immunities of diplomatic status have traditionally been reserved to those of acknowledged diplom......