Basis And Otherwise Comply With The: Fill & Download for Free

“ Internal Audit MICS Compliance Reporting Guidelines ““ NIGC: National Indian Gaming CommissionINTERNAL AUDIT MICS COMPLIANCE REPORTING GUIDELINES(Refer 542.22; 542.32; 542.42)August 12, 2005INTRODUCTIONEach tribe or its designated tribal gaming regulatory authority shall, in accordance with the tribal gaming ordinance, establish and implement tribal minimum internal control standards that shall:1. Provide a level of control that equals or exceeds those set forth in Section 542;2. Contain standards for currency transaction reporting that comply with 31CFR part 103;3. Establish standards for games which are not addressed in Section 542; and4. Each gaming operation must be in compliance with the tribal internal control standards within nine (9) months from June 27, 2002. However, the tribal gaming regulatory authority may extend the deadline by an additional six (6) months if written notice is provided to the NIGC no later than two weeks before the expiration of the nine (9) month period.Each tribe or its designated tribal gaming regulatory authority shall, in accordance with the tribal gaming ordinance, establish and implement tribal internal control standards that equal or exceeds the revised standards published on August 12, 2005 that shall include the following on internal audit guidelines:1.The NIGC MICS Section 542.22 (g), 542.32 (g), and 542.42 (g), states:(g) Internal Audit Guidelines. In connection with the internal audit testing pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the Commission shall develop recommended Internal Audit Guidelines, which shall be available upon request.2. Each gaming operation must be in compliance with the revised tribal internal control standards within four (4) months from August 12, 2005. However, the tribal gaming regulatory authority may extend the deadline by an additional sixty (60) days if written notice is provided to the NIGC no later than December 12, 2005.These guidelines are developed to ensure that all gaming operations that are required to provide for an internal audit function are performing a minimum amount and similar types of internal audit compliance procedures pursuant to the NIGC Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS).Objectives25 CFR Part 542 (MICS) requires the gaming operation’s internal auditor to perform observations, document examinations and inquiries of employees to determine compliance with applicable minimum internal controls standards. The NIGC publishes recommended checklists, programs and guidelines for use in satisfying this regulatory requirement. The primary objective of these checklists, programs and guidelines is to provide guidance on what is necessary to comply with 25 CFR Part 542 (MICS). A secondary objective is to provide some consistency among internal audit departments and other individuals performing internal audit work by providing recommendations on standardizing the document examination sample sizes and the scope of the work to be performed. Standardization requirements ensure that all internal audit departments are performing a minimum amount of work and are performing the same required procedures. Finally, by standardizing the questionnaires, the NIGC is able to review any internal auditor’s workpapers in a more efficient and time saving manner without having to adjust to the myriad of internal audit department and accounting firm styles.Each checklist provided by the NIGC contains meaning of terms used including sample size and a testing program. Although the checklists are not to be considered all-encompassing, they address the Minimum Internal Control Standards that became effective on June 27, 2002 and revised on May 4, 2005, August 12, 2005, and May 11, 2006. As the information changes due to the adoption of new regulations, internal auditors are expected to develop their own testing procedures until updated versions of the checklists are distributed. Additionally, these Guidelines are not intended to limit the internal auditor to the performance of only the above-specified procedures. If additional procedures are performed (e.g., expanded document testing), the results obtained should be included in the internal auditor’s report pursuant to 25 CFR Part 542 (MICS). The internal auditor may also develop compliance checklists appropriate for a Tier A, Tier B, or Tier C gaming operation that at a minimum address the MICS.In connection with the issuance of the NIGC MICS Sections 542.22; 542.32; and 542.42 the Internal Auditor is offered the following information as recommended guidance:Requirement for Internal Audit FunctionInternal Audit Minimum Internal Control Standard (a)(1) requires that a separate internal audit department be maintained whose primary function is performing internal audit work and that is independent with respect to the departments subject to audit. Pursuant to (a)(1), for gaming operations who meet the requirements of a Tier A or Tier B gaming operation who are not required to maintain a separate internal audit department, personnel who are independent with respect to the departments/procedures being examined perform internal audit work.Additionally, all Tier A, B, and C gaming operations, as defined in Section 542.2, must provide for an internal audit function. The following are definitions of the different Tier classifications:Tier A means gaming operations with annual gross gaming revenues of more than $1 million but not more than $5 million.Tier B means gaming operations with annual gross gaming revenues of more than $5 million but not more than $15 million.Tier C means gaming operations with annual gross gaming revenues of more than $15 million.Independent Accountant Performs Internal Audit FunctionGaming operations may elect to have an independent accountant perform the internal audit function rather than using its own internal auditors. If the independent accountant is engaged to perform the internal audit procedures, the required observations of the table games/gaming machine drops and counts must be separately performed to satisfy the internal audit observation requirements and independent accountant tests of controls as required by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants guide which satisfies the Internal Audit Minimum Internal Control Standard (b)(3).When the same CPA firm performs the procedures required by Section 542.22; 542.32; or 542.42 and Section 542.3(f), it is recommended that the individual(s) performing the Section 542.22; 542.32; or 542.42 procedures cannot also perform Section 542.3(f) drop and count procedures.Independent Accountant Reliance on Internal Auditors – Section 542.3(f)(3)The CPA firm may rely on the work of an internal auditor, to the extent allowed by the professional standards, for the performance of the recommended procedures specified in paragraphs at Section 542.3(f)(1)(iii)(B), (C), and (D), and for the completion of the checklists as they relate to the procedures covered therein provided that the internal audit department can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the CPA that the requirements contained within Section 542.22, 542.32, or 542.42, as applicable, have been satisfied.Agreed-upon procedures are to be performed by the CPA to determine that the internal audit procedures performed for a past 12-month period (includes two 6-month periods) encompassing a portion or all of the most recent business year has been properly completed. The CPA will apply Agreed-Upon Procedures to the gaming operation’s written assertion as specified in paragraphs at Section 542.3(f)(3)(ii)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), and (F).ProceduresIt is recommended that the internal auditor perform the following:1. Complete the applicable testing procedures checklist by performing inquiries and observations during the period under review, and perform document compliance testing for dates within the period under review. Within the checklists provided by the NIGC unless specified otherwise, the standard document testing for gaming machines and table games involves a sample size of two (2) days, all shifts. One test date should be selected from the first six (6) months of the audit period and the second test date selected from the six (6) month period immediately preceding the examination. Standard document testing for all other areas involves a sample selection of one (1) day, all shifts, from the twelve (12) month period immediately preceding the audit. The days are to be randomly selected. Where monthly testing is required, the months used will be the months that include the selected test dates.2. A separate checklist must be completed for each major gaming area of the gaming operation which satisfies the Internal Audit Minimum Internal Control Standard (b)(1). Theses gaming areas include, but are not limited to, bingo; pull tabs; card games; keno; pari-mutual wagering; table games; gaming machines; cage and credit procedures; information technology functions; and complimentary service or items. These checklists are used to determine if the gaming operation’s procedures in effect and the documents in use comply with the MICS. Each checklist must at least be completed once each year in accordance with the MICS.Performance and CompletionIt is recommended that the internal auditor perform and complete procedures in accordance with the following requirements:1. All questions on each applicable checklist must be completed. Detailed explanations must be provided for all “no” responses and for exceptions noted during document testing.2. Observations must be performed on an unannounced basis and, whenever possible, are to be performed without the employees being aware that their activities are being observed. For purposes of these procedures, “unannounced” means that no officers, directors, or employees are given advance information regarding the specific dates or times of such observations. Such observations may be performed from the surveillance room if practical. If advance arrangements for count room access are necessary between the gaming operation and the internal auditor, the arrangements indicating the method that will be used to allow the internal auditor access to the gaming operation’s count rooms should be made. Documentation should be prepared by the internal auditor indicating the date the arrangements were made, the time period the arrangement is in effect, procedures to allow the internal auditor prompt access to the gaming operation’s count room and the method to ensure proper identification of the internal auditor. These arrangements should allow the internal auditor prompt access to the count rooms at any time without prior notification to any gaming operation personnel. Any subsequent updates to these arrangements (e.g., personnel updates) should be made on a regular basis (e.g., quarterly) to avoid alerting the gaming operation of an upcoming observation.Observations may be performed live using surveillance equipment. However, because the internal auditor must observe the count until the monies are transferred to the vault/cage and accepted into the vault/cage accountability, it is recommended that any change in viewing location (i.e., from the count room to the surveillance room) will necessitate reviewing the surveillance tapes for the time period during which the auditor was in transit.3. The gaming operation’s written system of internal control must be compared by the internal auditor against actual control procedures in effect as they relate to compliance with the NIGC MICS and approved MICS variances. The internal auditor must also compare the written system of internal control to the gaming operation’s policies and procedures.4. The internal auditor performs compliance testing of various departments referred to in the checklists to determine compliance with the NIGC MICS and to determine if the gaming operation’s recording and reporting procedures are adequate and accurate. The scope of such testing is indicated on the checklist where applicable. When multiple test dates are required to be selected, the days are to be randomly selected. The checklists and/or back-up workpapers must include documentation of the original document examined by either explicitly identifying the form(s) (e.g., document # of slot jackpot form) examined or including a copy of the document(s) examined.5. Documentation should be prepared to evidence all internal audit work performed, including all instances of noncompliance.6. All material exceptions resulting from internal audit work are investigated and resolved with the results of such being documented. Documentation should include the names of individuals with whom inquiries were made and how the investigation was conducted.7. The results of internal audit work should be reported directly to the Tribe, Tribal gaming regulatory authority, audit committee, or other entity designated by the Tribe and to management personnel who are independent of the departments under review. Internal audit findings are properly communicated to the appropriate employees of the gaming operation.8. Follow-up inquiries, observations, and examinations are performed to verify that corrective action has been taken regarding all instances of noncompliance cited by internal audit, the independent accountant, and/or the Commission. The verification is performed within six (6) months following the date of notification.9. Although not required by Section 542.22; 542.32; or 542.42, it is recommended that the internal auditor perform testing for compliance with 31 CFR Part 103 and other such Bank Secrecy Act regulations specific to the reporting of income recognition transactions. Sample size should consider the frequency of transactions subject to the referenced reporting requirements.The above procedures are the recommended minimum procedures to be performed.These recommended guidelines are not intended to limit the internal auditor to the performance of only the above-specified procedures. If additional procedures are performed (e.g., expanded document testing), the results should be included in the internal audit report.Report Submission RequirementsA copy of the internal auditor’s report identifying procedures required by the NIGC and any additional gaming-related compliance audit procedures not required by the NIGC, a reference to the applicable internal audit checklists completed, all instances of noncompliance noted (regardless of materiality), the review period, and management personnel responses to the noted noncompliance should be available for review by the Tribal gaming regulatory authority. Additionally, regarding noted noncompliance, the report must describe all instances of procedural noncompliance (regardless of materiality) with the regulations, Tribal MICS, NIGC MICS or approved MICS variances, and all instances where the gaming operation’s written system of internal control does not adequately reflect the gaming operations actual control procedures in effect as they relate to compliance with the NIGC MICS and approved MICS variances.It is recommended that the following information be included in the audit report:a. Audit objectives.b. Audit procedures and scope.c. A narrative description of the noncompliance, including the number of exceptions.d. The citation of the applicable National Indian Gaming Commission Minimum Internal Control Standard, Tribal Internal Control Standard, and State Compact, as applicable, for which the instance of noncompliance was noted.e. Recommendations, if applicable.f. Management’s responses to the noted instances of noncompliance.g. If the instance of noncompliance is determined to be immaterial, a broad management response acknowledging the instances of immaterial noncompliance is acceptable. The immaterial instances of noncompliance may be disclosed as a separate section of the report.h. Instances in which the written system of internal control does not reflect the actual control procedures in effect as they relate to compliance with the NIGC MICS and approved MICS variances.Please contact the NIGC’s Audit Division if you require clarification of the preceding guidelines.Traci SantillanesAudit ManagerNational Indian Gaming Commission(208) 220-5389 [email protected] ““Internal Control Assessment”“Our Internal Control Assessment (ICA) testing can be a comprehensive review of a tribal gaming facility’s entire system of internal controls or a specific examination of a single gaming activity such as Bingo, Table Games, Gaming Machines, among others. The ICA can be tailored to meet the needs of the tribal gaming operation and will provide a level of assurance commensurate with industry standards.The ICA testing consists of a thorough examination of gaming related documentation, observation of control procedures, performs interviews of the operation’s personnel, and assessment and evaluation of the implementation of TICS/SICS and processes employed by the tribal gaming facility. The examination and testing can be tailored to the tribal regulator’s Tribal Internal Control Standards (TICS), Part 543 Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS) or any other internal control standards requested. The ICA report and recommendations will be forwarded to the tribe and tribal regulators. The NIGC will also be available to assist in any remediation and/or onsite training as determined by the tribe and tribal regulator.The services will be performed by a team of NIGC auditors on-site who will conduct the ICA in coordination with casino and tribal regulatory personnel.The ICA testing can include, but may not be limited to the following items:Detailed examination of casino and accounting records and documentation;Observation of critical procedures such as drop and count, cage, etc.;Interviews of casino personnel in performance of Policies and Procedures;Review of the tribal gaming facility’s TICS and SICS;Identification and reporting of any documented deficiencies resulting from the testing of the TICS, SICS, MICS or other internal control standards;Recommendations for remediation of any findings and any updates to TICS or SICS;Advisory comments for increased efficiency and security of internal control processes;At the conclusion of the ICA, a detailed report will be provided that summarizes the methods of testing and the results, which include:Objectives – A summary of the overall objectives of the ICA;Procedures and Scope – A summary of the testing methods performed;Findings – A detailed report containing the results of the testing performed and identification of any deficiencies;Recommendations – Provide recommendations to help improve the deficiencies identified and other areas of concern;Advisory Comments – A report of items that do not constitute findings but include recommendations intended to increase efficiency and security of the internal control processes.ContactDivision of ComplianceEmail: [email protected] InformationAn IT Vulnerability Assessment can also be performed in conjunction with your ICA.”“ Financial Submissions ““ Financial Statement Audits and AUP’sFor each fiscal year of the gaming operation(s) a tribe shall engage an independent certified public accountant to provide an annual audit of the comparative financial statements of each Class II and Class III gaming operation on Indian lands (25 CFR § 571.12 ) and, if applicable, agreed-upon procedures (AUP) report(s) (25 CFR § 543.23(d)).Tribes may submit one electronic copy, or two paper copies, of the financial statements and audits together with management letter(s) and, if applicable, the AUP report(s). Copies of the audit report(s) and management letter(s) and, if applicable, the AUP report(s) setting forth the results of each annual audit of a gaming operation are to be submitted by the tribes to the NIGC within 120 days after the end of each fiscal year (25 CFR § 571.13 and 25 CFR § 543.23(d)).Electronic submission:[email protected] mail/overnight:NIGC Attn: Financec/o Department of the Interior1849 C Street, N.W.Mail Stop # 1621Washington, DC [email protected] ““Internal Audit MICS Compliance”“Minimum Internal Control Standards (25 CFR part 542)25 CFR part 542 (This link will take you to GPO's Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) website.)MICS ChecklistsMinimum Internal Control Standards (25 CFR part 543)25 CFR part 543 - Helpful Hints25 CFR part 543 (This link will take you to GPO's Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) website.)25 CFR part 543 - Minimum Internal Control Standards-KiosksRecommended Report Formats for Section 542.3(f)(4)(i)Applying Agreed-Upon ProceduresProfessional Standards AT 201 Agreed-Upon Procedures EngagementsInternal AuditsInternal Audit MICS Compliance Reporting GuidelinesVarianceHow Do I Request A Concurrence”?

Actually we have a treaty with Ukraine on this where we are supposed to share information on each other's citizens who commit criminal activity in each other's country.Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 79-118 WASHINGTON : 1999    LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL   ----------    The White House, November 10, 1999. To the Senate of the United States:  With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the  Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between  the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal  Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on  July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the  Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30,  1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well  as the report of the Department of State with respect to the  Treaty.  The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal  assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in  order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The  Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution  of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking  offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad  range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance  available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or  statements of persons; providing documents, records, and  articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or  identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for  testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches  and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint,  confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection  of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by  the laws of the requested state.  I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable  consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to  ratification.   William J. Clinton.  LETTER OF SUBMITTAL   ----------      Department of State,  Washington, October 19, 1999. The President, The White House.  The President: I have the honor to submit to you the Treaty  Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual  Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex (``the  Treaty''), signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I recommend that  the Treaty be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and  consent to ratification.  Also enclosed, for the information of the Senate, is an  exchange of notes under which the Treaty is being provisionally  applied to the extent possible under our respective domestic  laws, in order to provide a basis for immediate mutual  assistance in criminal matters. Provisional application would  cease upon entry into force of the Treaty.  The Treaty covers mutual legal assistance in criminal  matters. In recent years, similar bilateral treaties have  entered into force with a number of other countries. The Treaty  with Ukraine contains all essential provisions sought by the  United States. It will enhance our ability to investigate and  prosecute a range of offenses. The Treaty is designed to be  self-executing and will not require new legislation.  Article 1 sets forth a non-exclusive list of the major  types of assistance to be provided under the Treaty, including  taking the testimony or statements of persons; providing  documents, records and other items of evidence; locating or  identifying persons or items; serving documents; transferring  persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing  requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings  related to immobilization and forfeiture of assets,  restitution, and collection of fines; and, rendering any other  form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested  State. The scope of the Treaty includes not only criminal  offenses, but also proceedings related to criminal matters,  which may be civil or administrative in nature.  Article 1(3) states that assistance shall be provided  without regard to whether the conduct involved would constitute  an offense under the laws of the Requested State.  Article 1(4) states explicitly that the Treaty is not  intended to create rights in private parties to obtain,  suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution  of a request.  Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central  Authorities and defines Central Authorities for purposes of the  Treaty. For the United States, the Central Authority shall be  the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney  General. For Ukraine, the Central Authority shall be the  Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor General.  The article provides that the Central Authorities shall  communicate directly with one another for the purposes of the  Treaty.  Article 3 sets forth the circumstances under which a  Requested State's Central Authority may deny assistance under  the Treaty. A request may be denied if it relates to a military  offense that would not be an offense under ordinary criminal  law. A further ground for denial is that the request relates to  a political offense (a term expected to be defined on the basis  of that term's usage in extradition treaties). In addition, a  request may be denied if its execution would prejudice the  security or similar essential interests of the Requested State,  or if it is not made in conformity with the Treaty.  Before denying assistance under Article 3, the Central  Authority of the Requested State is required to consult with  its counterpart in the Requesting State to consider whether  assistance can be given subject to such conditions as the  Central Authority of the RequestedState deems necessary. If the  Requesting State accepts assistance subject to these conditions, it is  required to comply with the conditions. If the Central Authority of the  Requested State denies assistance, it is required to inform the Central  Authority of the Requesting State of the reasons for the denial.  Article 4 prescribes the form and content of written  requests under the Treaty, specifying in detail the information  required in each request. The article permits other forms of  requests in emergency situations but requires written  confirmation within ten days thereafter unless the Central  Authority of the Requested State agrees otherwise.  Article 5 requires the Central Authority of the Requested  State to execute the request promptly or to transmit it to the  authority having jurisdiction to do so. It provides that the  competent authorities of the Requested State shall do  everything in their power to execute a request, and that the  courts or other competent authorities of the Requested State  shall have authority to issue subpoenas, search and arrest  warrants, or other orders necessary to execute the request. The  Central Authority of the Requested State must make all  arrangements for representation of the Requesting State in any  proceedings arising out of an assistance request.  Under Article 5(3), requests are to be executed in  accordance with the laws of the Requested State except to the  extent that the Treaty provides otherwise. However, the method  of execution specified in the request is to be followed except  insofar as it is prohibited by the laws of the Requested State.  Article 5(4) provides that if the Central Authority of the  Requested State determines that execution of the request would  interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation, prosecution,  or proceeding in that State, it may postpone execution or,  after consulting with the Central Authority of the Requesting  State, impose conditions on execution. If the Requesting State  accepts assistance subject to the conditions, it shall comply  with such conditions.  Article 5(5) further requires the Requested State, if so  requested, to use its best efforts to keep confidential a  request and its contents, and to inform the Requesting State's  Central Authority if the request cannot be executed without  breaching confidentiality. This provides the Requesting State  an opportunity to decide whether to pursue the request or to  withdraw it in order to maintain confidentiality.  This article additionally requires the Requested State's  Central Authority to respond to reasonable inquiries by the  Requesting State's Central Authority regarding the status of  the execution of a particular request; to report promptly to  the Requesting State's Central Authority the outcome of its  execution; and, if the request is denied, to inform the  Requesting State's Central Authority of the reasons for the  denial.  Article 6 apportions between the two States the costs  incurred in executing a request. It provides that the Request  State shall pay all costs, except for the following items to be  paid by the Requesting State: fees of expert witnesses, costs  of interpretation, translation and transcription, and  allowances and expenses related to travel of persons pursuant  to Articles 10 and 11. If during the execution of the request,  it becomes apparent that extraordinary expenses will be  entailed, the Central Authorities shall consult to determine  the terms and conditions under which execution may continue.  Article 7 requires the Requesting State to comply with any  request by the Central Authority of the Requested State that  information or evidence obtained under the Treaty not be used  for proceedings other than those described in the request  without its priorconsent. Further, if the Requested State's  Central Authority asks that information or evidence furnished under  this Treaty be kept confidential or be used in accordance with  specified conditions, the Requesting State must use its best efforts to  comply with the conditions. Once information is made public in the  Requesting State in accordance with either or these provisions, no  further limitations on use apply. Nothing in the article prevents the  use or disclosure of information to the extent that there is an  obligation to do so under the Constitution of the Requesting State in a  criminal prosecution. The Requesting State is obliged to notify the  Requesting State in advance of any such proposed use or disclosure.  Article 8 provides that a person in the Requesting State  from whom testimony or evidence is requested pursuant to the  Treaty shall be compelled, if necessary, to appear and testify  or produce items, documents and records. The article requires  the Central Authority of the Requested State, upon request, to  furnish information in advance about the date and place of the  taking of testimony or evidence pursuant to this Article.  Article 8(3) further requires the Requested State to permit  the presence of persons specified in the request and to permit  them to question the person giving the testimony or evidence.  In the event that a person whose testimony or evidence is being  taken asserts a claim of immunity, incapacity, or privilege  under the laws of the Requesting State, Article 8(4) provides  that the testimony or evidence shall be taken and the claim  made known by written notification to the Central Authority of  the Requesting State for resolution by its competent  authorities. Finally, in order to ensure admissibility of  evidence in the Requesting State, Article 8(5) provides a  mechanism for authenticating evidence that is produced pursuant  to or that is the subject of testimony taken in the Requested  State.  Article 9 requires that the Requested State provide the  Requesting State with copies of publicly available records in  the possession of government departments and agencies in the  Requesting State. The Requested State may further provide  copies of any documents, records or information in the  possession of a government department or agency, but not  publicly available, to the same extent and under the same  conditions as it would provide them to its own law enforcement  or judicial authorities. The Requested State has the discretion  to refuse to execute, entirely or in part, such requests for  records not publicly available. Article 9(3) provides that  records produced pursuant to this Article shall, upon request,  be certified by the appropriate form attached to the request.  Article 9(3) also provides that no further authentication shall  be necessary for admissibility into evidence in the Requesting  State of official records pursuant to this Article.  Article 10 provides a mechanism for the Requesting State to  invite the voluntary appearance in its territory of a person  located in the Requested State shall indicate the extent to  which the expenses will be paid. It also states that the  Central Authority of the Requesting State has discretion to  determine that a person appearing in the Requesting State  pursuant to this Article shall not be subject to service of  process or be detained or subjected to any restriction of  personal liberty by reason of any acts or convictions that  preceded his departure from the Requested State. Any safe  conduct provided for by this article ceases seven days after  the Central Authority of the Requesting State has notified the  Central Authority of the Requested State that the person's  presence is no longer required, or if the person has left the  Requesting State and voluntarily returns to it.  Article 11 provides for temporary transfer of a person in  custody in the Requested State or in a third State to the  Requesting State for purposes of assistance under the Treaty  (for example, a witness incarcerated in the Requested State may  be transferred to have his deposition taken in the presence of  the defendant), provided that the person in question and the  Central Authorities of both States agree. The article also  provides for voluntary transfer of a person in the custody of  the Requesting State to the Requested State for purposes of  assistance under the Treaty (for example, a defendant in the  Requesting State may be transferred for purposes of attending a  witness deposition in the Requesting State), if the person  consents and if the Central Authorities of both States agree.  Article 11(3) further establishes both the express  authority and the obligation of the receiving State to maintain  the person transferred in custody unless otherwise agreed by  both Central Authorities. The return of the person transferred  is subject to terms and conditions agreed to by the Central  Authorities, and the sending State is not required to initiate  extradition proceedings for return of the person transferred.  The person transferred receives credit for time served in the  custody of the receiving State.  Article 12 establishes the authority of the Requested State  to authorize transit through its territory of a person held in  custody by a third State whose appearance has been requested by  the Requesting State. The Requested State further has the  authority and the obligation to keep the person in custody  during transit. The Parties retain discretion to refuse to  grant transit of their own nationals, however.  Article 13 requires the Requested State to use its best  efforts to ascertain the location or identity of persons or  items specified in a request.  Article 14 obligates the Requested State to use its best  efforts to effect service of any document relating, in whole or  in part, to any request for assistance under the Treaty. A  request for the service of a document requiring a person to  appear in the Requesting State must be transmitted a reasonable  time before the scheduled appearance. Proof of service is to be  provided in the manner specified in the request.  Article 15 obligates the Requested State to execute  requests for search, seizure, and delivery of any item to the  Requesting State if the request includes the information  justifying such action under the laws of theappropriate. The  Central Authority of the State receiving such information is required  to inform the Central Authority that provided the information of any  action taken.  Article 17 also obligates the Contracting States to assist  each other to the extent permitted by their respective laws in  proceedings relating to forfeiture of the proceeds and  instrumentalities of offenses, restitution to victims of crime,  and collection of fines imposed as sentences in criminal  prosecutions. This may include action to temporarily immobilize  the proceeds or instrumentalities pending further proceedings.  The Contracting State having custody over proceeds or  instrumentalities of offenses is required to dispose of them in  accordance with its laws. Either Contracting State may transfer  all or part of such assets, or the proceeds of their sale, to  the extent permitted by the transferring State's laws and upon  such terms as it deems appropriate.  Article 18 states that assistance and procedures provided  in the Treaty shall not prevent either Contracting State from  granting assistance to the other Contracting State through the  provisions of other applicable international agreements or  through the provisions of its national law. The Contracting  States may also provide assistance pursuant to any bilateral  arrangement, agreement, or practice which may be applicable.  Article 19 provides that the Central Authorities of the  Contracting States shall consult, at times mutually agreed, to  promote the most effective use of the Treaty, and may agree  upon such practical measures as may be necessary to facilitate  the Treaty's implementation.  Article 20 provides that the Treaty is subject to  ratification and the instruments shall be exchanged at  Washington as soon as possible. The Treaty enters into force  upon the exchange of instruments of ratification. Article 20  further provides that either Contracting State may terminate  the Treaty by written notice to the other Contracting State,  with termination to be effective six months following the date  of notification.  A Technical Analysis explaining in detail the provisions of  the Treaty is being prepared by the United States negotiating  delegation, consisting of representatives from the Departments  of Justice and State, and will be transmitted separately to the  Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.  The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in  favoring approval of this Treaty by the Senate as soon as  possible.  Respectfully submitted,  Strobe Talbott.     Site ContentLegislationCongressional RecordCongressional Record IndexMembersCommitteesCommittee ReportsNominationsTreaty DocumentsHouse CommunicationsSenate CommunicationsLegislative ProcessAbout Congress.govHelpHelp | Feedback | Contact UsGlossarySearch ToolsAsk a Law LibrarianWebinarsWays to ConnectTwitterYouTubeVideoRSS & Email AlertsBlog – In Custodia Legis: Law Librarians of CongressResourcesCongress.gov ResourcesCRS ReportsU.S. CodeGPO govinfoLaw Library of CongressGuide to Law OnlineTeacher Lesson PlansState Legislature WebsitesBill Status Bulk DataRoll Call VotesConstitution AnnotatedLaw Library ReportsHouse LinksHouse.govFloor ActivitiesRepresentativesCommitteesHearings (Video)Bills to Be ConsideredLeadershipHistory, Art & ArchivesMore House ResourcesSenate LinksSenate.govOn the Senate FloorSenatorsCommitteesHearings (Schedule)LeadershipHistory, Art & StatisticsMore Senate ResourcesLegalAccessibilityHelpContact UsExternal Link DisclaimerUSA.gov