[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S REWARDS PROGRAMS: PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 7, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-129
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
73-278 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey--
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California deceased 3/6/12 deg.
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
RON PAUL, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
JOE WILSON, South Carolina RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
CONNIE MACK, Florida ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
DAVID RIVERA, Florida CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas KAREN BASS, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
ROBERT TURNER, New York
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
TED POE, Texas BRAD SHERMAN, California
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Mr. Robert A. Hartung, Assistant Director, Threat Investigations
and Analysis Directorate, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, U.S.
Department of State............................................ 8
Ms. M. Brooke Darby, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S.
Department of State............................................ 15
The Honorable Stephen J. Rapp, Ambassador-at-Large, Office of
Global Criminal Justice........................................ 24
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from
the State of California, and chairman, Subcommittee on
Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade: Prepared statement..... 3
Mr. Robert A. Hartung: Prepared statement........................ 10
Ms. M. Brooke Darby: Prepared statement.......................... 17
The Honorable Stephen J. Rapp: Prepared statement................ 26
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 42
Hearing minutes.................................................. 43
THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S REWARDS PROGRAMS: PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2012
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Nonproliferation, and Trade,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:10 p.m., in
room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward R. Royce
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Royce. This hearing of the subcommittee will come to
order. Today the subcommittee examines the State Department's
rewards programs and proposals for the expansion of that
program. The State Department currently runs three different
programs which offer reward money.
There is the Rewards for Justice, Narcotics Rewards, and
the War Crimes Rewards programs. Monetary awards are offered to
those individuals who come forward, often at great personal
risk to provide information that helps locate and capture
terrorists or drug traffickers or certain wanted war criminals.
The terrorism rewards program, which dates back to the
Reagan administration and the bombing at the Beirut Embassy, is
the most recognized of the three. Besides paid newspaper and
radio spots, the program uses billboards, it uses posters and
flyers to publicize reward offers, and given the prominence of
smoking overseas, they also use matchbooks, such as these,
which are distributed among the people. Several years ago, the
program faced some criticism that its publicity campaigns were
poorly constructed. So we look forward to hearing today about
how that has changed.
As we will hear today, all three programs can point to some
significant victories. Terrorism rewards helped locate and put
Ramzi Yousef behind bars. The Narcotics Rewards Program helped
nab FARC commanders in Colombia and drug traffickers operating
from Venezuela and Thailand. The war crimes programs have led
to the arrest of some of the worst war criminals.
A reward on your head creates for the individual
significant angst. As the State Department will testify, one
captured narcotics target told the DEA that he could no longer
trust anyone in his organization after a $5-million reward was
offered. He felt, he said, ``like a hunted man.'' And given the
destruction many of these characters do to the globe and to the
people in their country, this is money well spent.
But we live in a much different world than the one of the
1980s when these programs were first designed. Today
transnational criminals are diversifying. And they are looking
to sell anything to anybody. It could be arms. It could be
intellectual property. It could be people. And one such arms
trafficker was Viktor Bout, who supplied weapons to insurgents
on both sides of the war, to militias, to terrorists around the
world until his conviction in Federal Court. Reportedly the
Narcotics Rewards Program helped to bag the ``merchant of
death,'' as he was called, Viktor Bout.
The overlap between the networks employed by criminals and
employed by terrorists is growing. To keep pace, I have
introduced legislation, H.R. 4077, cosponsored by Ranking
Member Sherman and subcommittee member Poe, that would target
transnational organized crime figures with a rewards program.
Just as important, the legislation allows the rewards program
to target those who are wanted for genocide or war crimes or
crimes against humanity. In other words, the world's worst
human rights abusers.
A likely target of this new war crimes authority would be
Joseph Kony and the top commanders of the Lord's Resistance
Army. This group has terrorized northern Uganda and Central
Africa for two decades with unspeakable crimes. In accordance
with U.S. policy, a small team of U.S. troops are currently in
the field helping local forces hunt down the individual who has
captured over 30,000 children over the years. The women and
girls he turned into concubines; the boys, into child soldiers.
Our U.S. troops believe a rewards program aimed at Kony could
bolster their efforts. That could generate the intelligence and
that could boost the defections, and that could assist, because
the ultimate work here is going to be undertaken by the Ugandan
forces, who will basically either remove Kony from the
battlefield and bring him to the bar of justice one way or the
other.
This subcommittee looks forward to the testimony today and
advancing this important legislation to the House floor. I will
now turn to Ranking Member Sherman for his opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Royce follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing on examining the State Department's reward program and
how those programs can be expanded.
The State Department currently runs reward programs in
three areas: The reward for justice program, focused on
terrorism; the narcotics reward program; and the War Crimes
Rewards Program, which targets war criminals subject to certain
tribunals. I support the State Department's rewards programs,
which have been effective in leading to the capture of some of
the most reprehensible individuals. We save innocent lives. We
save taxpayer money in the long run by rewarding those who give
us information, often at great risk to themselves.
I support expanding this program. I have cosponsored your
bill, H.R. 4077, which is bipartisan legislation which would
expand the program to target transnational organized crime and
those wanted for the most serious human rights abuses, all for
reasons you well explained in your opening statement.
These efforts began, these programs began in the 1980s. The
programs were designed by the diplomatic security agent who
investigated the 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut
perpetrated by Hezbollah with direct help from Iran. The
program was expanded to cover narcotics traffickers and some
war criminals in the late 1980s. Today, rewards go up to $25
million; $25 million is the reward for information leading to
the capture or death of key al-Qaeda leaders, most notably bin
Laden but also including Ayman al-Zawahiri. The most recent
example of the State Department offering a terrorism reward was
for Yasin al-Suri, identified as a key fundraiser for al-Qaeda.
According to the State Department, al-Suri has operated out
of Iran since 2005. He is supposedly under house arrest, but
that may be a mistranslation; they may have meant special guest
of Iran. And he is providing al-Qaeda network with
transportation for operatives and access to money. Al-Zawahiri
is one of three individuals the U.S. Government is offering a
$10-million reward for. The other two are Mullah Omar, the
Taliban leader in Afghanistan, and Abu Dua, the leader of al-
Qaeda in Iraq. And one of the questions I will ask of our
witnesses is whether we should go even higher on those rewards
or others.
The State Department's Rewards for Justice Program focused
on terrorism is the most recognized of the three rewards
programs. The State Department, through the Secretary of State,
may offer rewards for information leading to the arrest or
conviction of anyone who plans or carries out acts of terrorism
against Americans at home or abroad, that prevents such acts
from occurring, that leads to the location of key terrorist
leaders or disrupts terrorist financing.
The State Department maintains a list of current reward
offers on its Web site, which is now available in nearly 30
languages. In addition to newspaper, radio, and TV ads in
foreign media, the program utilizes billboards, flyers,
postcards, and the well known matchbook cover. I see these
matchbooks are in English, and I hope very much that a far
greater number was created in Arabic, not that we need to worry
about any of the three guys pictured on this particular
matchbook at the present time. Many of us have seen these
matchbooks, and this is one of many creative ways to reach out
to those who may seek the reward.
The State Department takes measures to protect the identity
of a reward recipient's program and the recipient's immediate
family. Of course, the State Department must report to Congress
the total amounts spent on the program. Reward payments are
often not publicized, and those who receive them are eligible
for participation in the U.S. Witness Protection Program. I
look forward to hearing from our witnesses whether an explicit
offer of a U.S. visa for a family or even an extended family
should be part of certain posted rewards. No one--a lot of
people want money, very few want a death sentence, and they may
have some such in their home country.
I am going to skip ahead to a discussion of the chairman's
legislation. The Department of State Rewards Program Update and
Technical Corrections Act of 2012, this would expand the reward
programs to confront international organized crime and those
wanted for the most serious human rights abuses. The chairman's
bill would allow the State Department to pay for information
leading to the arrest or conviction of individuals engaged in
international or transnational organized crime or the
prevention or disruption of related criminal activities. The
State Department officials have identified the lack of
authority to target organized criminals with rewards as a major
gap in the counterterrorism efforts.
The bill would also allow the department to use the rewards
program to target others indicted by international hybrid or
mixed tribunals for the most serious human rights abuses,
including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, I commend you for this legislation.
Happy to cosponsor it, and I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses.
Mr. Royce. Thank you. Any other opening statements?
Mr. Connolly, would you like to say a few words?
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The 1984 Act to Combat International Terrorism established
the State Department's Rewards For Justice Program, one of
three rewards programs the State Department administers. The
law allows the Secretary of State to authorize rewards for
information that lead to the arrest or conviction of anyone who
plans, commits or attempts international terrorist acts against
U.S. persons or property, prevents such acts from occurring in
the first place, leads to the location of a key terrorist
leader or disrupts terrorist financing. The rewards program has
led to the apprehension of Uday Hussein, Qusay Hussein, and
Ramzi Yousef, among others. In fact, since the inception of the
Rewards for Justice Program in 1984, the U.S. has paid more
than $100 million to 70 people who provided credible
information to put terrorists behind bars or prevented acts of
international terrorism.
The RFJ is not the only rewards program in State's law
enforcement tool kit. The Narcotics Rewards Program, also
administered through the Bureau of International Narcotics and
Law Enforcement at State, offers rewards of up to $5 million
for information leading to the arrest and the conviction of
major narcotics traffickers who operate outside of the U.S.
Over $71 million has been awarded to individuals who provided
such information leading to the arrest or conviction of major
narcotics traffickers.
Last is the War Crimes Rewards Program, which the State
Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security administers in
conjunction with the Office of Global Criminal Justice. This
program is designed to bring to justice fugitives sought by the
U.N. International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia
and Rwanda.
Through the introduction of H.R. 4077, Chairman Royce has
proposed expanding the State Department's rewards programs to
confront transnational organized criminals and individuals
wanted for the most recent human rights abuses. An example of
somebody who might be targeted under such a proposed expansion
is Joseph Kony, head of the Lord's Resistance Army in East
Africa. It sounds like a commonsense expansion of the program,
especially given the committee's record on Joseph Kony. I look
forward to hearing more about the bill, including our
witnesses' thoughts on how expanding the program might
facilitate their mission.
And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership. I yield
back.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Mr. Connolly.
We are joined today by three representatives from the State
Department. First is Mr. Robert Hartung. He serves as assistant
director for the Threat Investigations and Analysis Directorate
in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. In this capacity, he
oversees all diplomatic security programs that analyze or
investigate or disseminate information on threats directed
against U.S. diplomatic personnel around the world.
Before becoming a diplomatic security special agent back in
1985, he worked as a staffer to former Senator Paul Trible of
Virginia.
Ms. Brooke Darby is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
in the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs. During her career, she has been responsible for
numerous programs in the bureau, including the Criminal Justice
Capacity Building Program in the Balkans, the program in
Afghanistan, and the one in Iraq. She has also served on the
National Security Staff. We welcome her.
And we have Ambassador Stephen Rapp, who heads the Office
of Global Criminal Justice. Prior to his appointment, he served
as prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, leading
the case against Charles Taylor. During his time serving in the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, he led the team
that won the first convictions in history for public incitement
to commit genocide via the media, the hate broadcasts that were
broadcast out over Rwanda. So it is good to see the Ambassador
again. I might add, we are awaiting the announcement of the
Charles Taylor verdict, hopefully in April. It is slated to
come down, and it is about time.
So we thank our witnesses all for being with us. I will
remind them that their complete testimony will be included in
the record. So if they keep their oral presentation to 5
minutes, that would be appreciated by the committee. We will
then go to questions.
So we will begin with Mr. Hartung. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF MR. ROBERT A. HARTUNG, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, THREAT
INVESTIGATIONS AND ANALYSIS DIRECTORATE, BUREAU OF DIPLOMATIC
SECURITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Hartung. Chairman Royce, members of the subcommittee,
good afternoon.
I am honored to appear before you today to discuss the role
that the Bureau of Diplomatic Security plays in the fight
against international terrorism through its Rewards for Justice
Program. I would like to thank you for your continued support
and interest in our program, as this collaboration helps enable
Diplomatic Security fulfill its worldwide mission.
Operating from a global platform in 25 U.S. cities and 159
foreign countries, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, or DS,
ensures that our country can conduct diplomacy safely and
securely while assuring the integrity of our borders. DS plays
a vital role in protecting U.S. Embassies and personnel
overseas, investigating passport and visa fraud, securing
critical information systems, and fighting terrorism.
To this end, Diplomatic Security's counterterrorism rewards
program, known as RFJ, is considered by the Department of State
to be one of the U.S. Government's most valuable assets in the
fight against international terrorism. The mission of the
program is to prevent terrorist acts, to disrupt terrorist
planning, and to bring terrorists to justice in a court of law,
U.S. or foreign.
The secondary goals of the program are also important, to
deter terrorist operations, to decrease geographic safe havens
for terrorists, and to restrict terrorists' freedom of
movement.
Rewards may be paid to individuals who provide information
leading to the arrest or conviction of those conspiring,
attempting, or committing an act of international terrorism
against U.S. persons or property or those aiding or abetting in
the commission of such acts. A reward may also be paid for the
information that prevents such acts from occurring in the first
place, for information identifying or locating those holding
key leadership positions in a terrorist organization, and for
the disruption of the financial mechanisms of a foreign
terrorist organization.
Since the program began in 1984, RFJ has garnered a number
of successes throughout the years. RFJ has paid over $100
million to more than 70 individuals who have provided vital
information.
Although the program's efforts are often classified for the
safety of its participants, I can share some of its landmark
cases with you today. In 1995 RFJ paid a $2-million reward to a
source that provided information to Diplomatic Security special
agents in Pakistan for the location of Ramzi Yousef, mastermind
of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Pakistani authorities,
assisted by Diplomatic Security agents, arrested Yousef in
Pakistan and extradited him to the United States. He is
currently serving a life sentence in prison in Colorado.
In 2003, RFJ paid a $30-million reward for information on
the exact whereabouts of Uday and Qusay Hussein. The 101st
Airborne Division conducted an operation to capture these
individuals. A 4-hour fire fight ensued, which resulted in the
deaths of the two brothers. In this instance, an RFJ campaign
was initiated, and in 18 days, the source came forward, the
fastest result in RFJ history.
And in 2007, the program paid a $10-million reward to
courageous Filipino citizens who provided information on the
locations of Abu Sayyaf group leaders, Khadaffy Janjalani and
Abu Solaiman. These two notorious high-ranking leaders of the
Abu Sayyaf group were killed by the armed forces of the
Philippines as a result of information provided by the sources.
Last year, DS generated four new reward offers. These
offers were for the following individuals: Harakat-ul-Jihad al-
Islami leader Ilyas Kashmiri; North Caucasus based Caucasus
Emirate senior leader and military commander, Doku Umarov; al-
Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Dua; and Yasin al-Suri, a senior al-
Qaeda facilitator and financier based in Iran. RFJ's $10-
million reward offer for al-Suri was the first made for a
terrorist financier.
As is evident, Mr. Chairman, the DS Rewards for Justice
Program is and will remain a valuable asset to the U.S.
Government in its fight against international terrorism. RFJ's
mission to prevent terrorist acts, disrupt terrorist financing,
and bring terrorists to justice remains paramount. RFJ is
engaging new media, new partners, and developing new practices
in its effort to meet the challenging security situation we
face in the ever-changing world. Every day, in all corners of
the globe, the men and women of the Bureau of Diplomatic
Security continue to work tirelessly to bring terrorists to
justice.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today, and I would be pleased to answer any
questions you may have.
Mr. Royce. Thank you for your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hartung follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Royce. Ms. Darby.
STATEMENT OF MS. M. BROOKE DARBY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ms. Darby. Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Sherman, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to
discuss the Department of State's Narcotics Rewards Program,
how it helps to bring major violators of U.S. narcotics
trafficking laws to justice, and your legislation to expand the
reach of our rewards program to capture other transnational
criminals.
The Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs, INL for short, which I help to lead is well known for
our efforts to build the capacity of foreign governments to
fight crime. We also administer key anticrime tools like the
Narcotics Rewards Program.
Let me start where the Narcotics Rewards Program began and
then tell you a bit about how it works. In 1986, Congress
authorized the Secretary of State to offer rewards for
information leading to the arrest or conviction of major
narcotics traffickers outside the United States. The rewards
program quickly proved to be a valuable tool for U.S. law
enforcement, helping to develop critical information on key
targets as well as putting pressure on drug trafficking
organizations, disrupting their activities, and leaving them
more vulnerable to law enforcement efforts.
Every step of the program is closely coordinated with U.S.
law enforcement agencies who serve on the Narcotics Rewards
Program committee, and in fact, the program operates from the
field up. Generally U.S. Federal agents working overseas
propose that the program target a fugitive from justice that
they are working to apprehend. The program committee validates
each request in Washington and develops an approach to
publicize a reward where appropriate.
When an informant's information has proved useful to U.S.
Federal agents, the agents can submit a request that a reward
payment be made to the informant. The Interagency Review
Committee then weighs a variety of factors, including the
importance of the trafficker targeted, the role played by the
informant, details of the arrest or interdiction operation,
risks taken by the informant to assist in effecting the arrest
or interdiction, and the suggested reward amount.
If the Secretary of State agrees with the committee's
recommendation to pay the informant, the Secretary will then
seek concurrence of the Attorney General before transferring
any funds to the U.S. law enforcement agency managing the
informant.
INL has developed a rigorous certification process for law
enforcement to validate and confirm when payments have been
made. We then notify Congress in classified form of each reward
payment before closing our case file. The Narcotics Rewards
Program has helped to bring many important narcotraffickers to
justice. One example is Arturo Beltran-Leyva and members of his
organization, who not only distributed shipments of hundreds of
kilograms of narcotics to the United States but also were
culpable for the rising violence just south of our border in
Mexico. That organization is now in shambles as a result of
successful law enforcement operations, informed by our program,
to take down the head and other members of the organization.
In some cases, the perceived or actual threat from the
publication of a reward has driven criminals to seek protection
from U.S. law enforcement, and as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman,
one captured trafficker, who was the subject of a $5-million
advertised reward, told DEA agents that after he was sought by
the Narcotics Rewards Program, he began to distrust everyone.
And his ability to maintain control of his organization was
diminished, and he felt like a hunted man.
Our U.S. and foreign law enforcement partners recognize the
Narcotics Rewards Program is a valuable tool to help bring drug
traffickers to justice and disrupt their operations. Since
1986, however, transnational criminals other than narcotics
traffickers have escaped the reach of the rewards program. On
July 25th, President Obama introduced a National Strategy to
Combat Transnational Organized Crime, which describes the
significant and evolving threat to the United States and the
global community that these transnational criminals pose and
advocates for additional tools to counter the threat.
The legislation that you have introduced, Chairman Royce,
and that you have cosponsored, Congressman Sherman, is such a
tool.
By updating the successful rewards program to include
transnational organized crime targets, you will extend the
reach of justice to major criminals who have transcended
borders with near impunity. These criminals victimize Americans
through Internet crimes, launder money, traffic arms and
people, and pirate America's intellectual property. To
illustrate the impact of these illicit activities, in an
average year, the United States seizes hundreds of millions of
dollars in counterfeit goods, estimated to be a mere fraction
of what is produced worldwide and imported for sale into the
United States.
Counterfeit products wreak havoc on our economy and, in
some cases, such as counterfeit pharmaceuticals, jeopardize the
health and safety of our citizens.
Under the President's strategy, we are committed to
pursuing transnational organized criminals and their networks
wherever they hide across the globe. Our Treasury Department
has already designated four major transnational criminal
organizations, the Yakuza, the Brothers Circle, Los Zetas, and
the Camorra for financial sanctions. With your support, a
future transnational organized crime rewards program could help
U.S. law enforcement do much more, dismantle these networks and
apprehend those who lead them.
Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Sherman, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for your interest in and support of
this important initiative to help our Nation combat
transnational organized crime. I look forward to working with
you to advance your legislation to provide new tools to counter
transnational crime and protect our national security
interests.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Ms. Darby.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Darby follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Royce. Ambassador.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE STEPHEN J. RAPP, AMBASSADOR-AT-
LARGE, OFFICE OF GLOBAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Ambassador Rapp. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee,
I would like to thank you and the subcommittee members for your
continued support and interest in the U.S. Department of
State's rewards program.
We welcome the legislation that you have introduced, H.R.
4077, which would allow the Department of State to better use
these programs to pursue and help bring to justice individuals
who have committed acts of genocide, war crimes, and crimes
against humanity.
The current War Crimes Rewards Program has been
instrumental in bringing to justice some of the most notorious
and brutal fugitives sought by the United Nations International
Criminal Tribunals for Yugoslavia, the ICTY, and for Rwanda,
the ICTR. In the last 2 years alone, we have made 14 payments
at an average of $400,000 per payment, ranging from $75,000 to
$2 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction
of these fugitives.
This program has been and continues to be very successful
in generating information that has led to the arrest of the
world's worst criminals.
However, the present statutory authority of the War Crimes
Rewards Program is limited to fugitives from the ICTY and ICTR
and the Special Court for Sierra Leone. From these tribunals,
which indicted more than 250 people, there remain only nine
targeted fugitives at large, all from the Rwanda tribunal.
After the capture of these fugitives, this program will cease
to be useful as a tool to ensure accountability.
The State Department would like to expand this program to
bolster our ongoing efforts to bring other alleged war
criminals to justice.
The proposed legislation, sponsored by you, Mr. Chairman,
would do just that. It would authorize the Secretary of State
to publicize and pay rewards for information leading to the
arrest and conviction of specifically identified foreign
nationals accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity or
genocide before any international criminal tribunal, including
hybrid or mixed courts.
Let me be clear: Under the proposed authority, fugitives
would only be added to the rewards program after careful review
and approval by an interagency committee and the Secretary of
State or designee. This is similar to the interagency committee
that now makes the decisions about the amounts of rewards to be
granted and that makes decisions about selection of individuals
upon which rewards may be provided in the terrorism and
narcotics programs. This committee would have representatives
of the State Department, DOD, DOJ, DHS, and the intelligence
community.
I want to focus on a few specific cases where this
authority would help our foreign policy objectives. You, Mr.
Chairman, mentioned the case of Joseph Kony of the Lord's
Resistance Army. As you noted, for two decades, he has carried
on a campaign of murder and terror and the abduction and
brainwashing of women and children; the women to become sex
slaves, the boys to become fighters. The U.N. estimates that
some 465,000 people were displaced or living as refugees across
three countries in 2011 as a result of the LRA threat.
The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants
for Joseph Kony and other top LRA leaders on charges of war
crimes and crimes against humanity, and although the United
States is not a party to the Rome statute establishing the ICC,
we support the ICC's efforts to bring the LRA leaders to
justice and believe they could be apprehended and held to
account for their actions.
You mentioned the group of U.S. military advisers,
consistent with the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda
Recovery Act, that have now been deployed in Central Africa and
are working with our partners, particularly the Ugandans, but
other forces as well in LRA-affected areas, helping to enhance
the capacity to bring these top commanders to justice.
The proposed expansion of the program would bolster our
efforts to generate information about the whereabouts of Joseph
Kony and other LRA commanders by giving lower level fighters a
material incentive to provide information. If Kony and other
commanders were added to the programs through the interagency
process I described, we could work to publicize the rewards
using leaflets, radio broadcasts, and other publicity tools,
like we have done with other fugitives.
Another individual is Abdullah al-Senussi, the head of, the
former head of Libyan military intelligence, who was the head
of one of the most powerful and efficient organs of repression
in Libya. And he is wanted by the ICC for his alleged
responsibility for crimes against humanity committed last
February. It has been reported that he has fled Libya, and he
is in hiding.
Of course, this will allow rewards not just in ICC cases
but to any court that has international presence as a mixed
court or hybrid tribunal. It will be crime-specific, not court-
specific, and as required under our ASPA law, our American
Service members Protection Act, it will be consistent with that
and being a case-by-case determination that is allowed by ASPA
where we can provide assistance to international justice.
The War Crimes Rewards Program, at the moment, we are
advertising rewards up to $5 million, although rewards up to
$25 million could be paid in exceptional cases, but as I note,
the average amount is some $400,000, and the amount of the
reward depends upon a number of factors, including which war
criminal is apprehended, the quality of the assistance
provided, and the risk taken by the informant. We believe that
the funding for the rewards authorized by this new legislation
could be provided through currently available resources and
transfer authorities.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the War Crimes Rewards Program
is and we hope will remain a valuable asset to the U.S. in its
fight to ensure that foreign nationals who commit serious
violations of international humanitarian law are held to
account, and we will continue to work tirelessly to bring these
perpetrators to justice. We thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you and to thank you for your continued
leadership in this area.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Ambassador.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Rapp follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Royce. I think it was back in 2004 that we commissioned
some studies to look at the media to see how we could better
utilize technology in order to bring people to the bar of
justice through this rewards program. I would ask if there has
been thought since then--well, first, let's just maybe review
what the studies told us, but now with the advent of social
media, maybe some thoughts on how that could be deployed in
order to assist worldwide in these efforts. Could I get some
responses to that?
Ambassador Rapp. Yeah, I certainly agree with you, Mr.
Chairman, we don't want to die with the secret that we have
these rewards on offer. And I have been involved in getting the
message out in Central Africa through community radio and other
media that people have access to there. But I think we need to
leave no stone unturned to make sure that people are aware of
these rewards, and we use every possible media that is
effective with a specific population.
Mr. Royce. One of the thoughts I have on this is the host
government cooperation used to be needed. In 2010, I know that
VOA began the process of actually broadcasting and could
effectively do that whether or not you had the host government
in support.
Well, as you begin to look at the use of social media,
again, you have the ability to work around whether or not the
state thinks it is important to track down the Viktor Bouts of
the world, and so I would appreciate any observations on that
methodology.
Ambassador Rapp. Well, we would certainly be supportive of
that, and we will be glad to follow up and report to you, but I
think the social media--I mean, it is true that throughout the
world, even in areas where electric power isn't necessarily
reliable, people are having access to the Internet, there are
hundreds of millions of subscribers to these sites. And we want
to make sure that we get the information out there and that
people understand it.
Mr. Royce. Do you have any thoughts on that, Ms. Darby?
Ms. Darby. Only to say that we absolutely agree that we
need to use all of the publicity tools at our disposal, and
that is an excellent recommendation and one we definitely will
take into account.
Mr. Royce. One of the things I have thought about also is
from a diplomatic aspect, when dealing with host countries, we
have longstanding relationships with, you know, maybe countries
like Italy where the Cosa Nostra is operating and no
opposition, but when we begin to talk about organized crime,
international, transnational organized crime operating out of
Russia or operating out of China, you can run into a situation
in the State Department where if you are overt, are you rocking
the boat vis-a-vis the relationship with Russia and so forth.
On the other hand, with these additional technologies that
might be available to us, there is a way to get at the target
without confronting the state, but I would just ask you, any
experience in the past with resistance in the State Department
to rocking the boat, if you will? I watched the reaction on the
part of the Russian Government just over this Viktor Bout
issue, and it truly was extraordinary the lengths they went to,
to try to suppress his apprehension, his transfer to custody,
his conviction, so I know that some of these figures have their
own supporters in certain host governments, and it has
complicated efforts to bring them to justice.
Mr. Hartung. If I just may add, with social networking, in
December, we held a press conference at the State Department
with the Department of Treasury on announcing that Yasin al-
Suri would be added to the list of the Rewards for Justice
Program, and at that time, working with an office within the
Department of State, we actually tweeted that information. So
we started using social network, and also we partnered with
Voice of America. As part of one of their broadcasts that goes
into Iran and other countries in the region, we conducted a
short interview with that program, and that has since been
broadcast in that region, and we are now exploring the use of
Facebook to get the message out even further.
Mr. Royce. One of the interesting aspects of Ms. Darby's
testimony, and I think you all might agree, is the way in which
the aspect of feeling hunted, being hunted, if you are a
transnational, if you are a criminal, can cripple an
organization, the idea that you can't depend upon the people in
your organization, in your operation because whatever you are
paying them, it is not this amount of money. And so someone
could turn on you.
I was going to ask in terms of the applicability of that to
transnational organized crime beyond the example you gave us,
which was a drug cartel, if you could give us your thoughts on
that.
Ms. Darby. Certainly, Mr. Chairman.
That is absolutely true. I mean, one of the benefits of
rewards is to encourage informants to come forward, obviously,
but the other chief benefit of a rewards program is disrupting
the operations of these drug trafficking organizations, and
with the new proposal on the table, transnational organized
criminal organizations, forcing them to change the way they do
business, which leaves them more vulnerable to law enforcement
efforts to go after them. So absolutely, we would agree.
Mr. Royce. Thank you. I think my time has expired.
I will turn to Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you.
In the imagination of a few nationalists in Islamabad,
everyone in Pakistan speaks Urdu. In reality, the Punjabi and
Sindhi languages are spoken by far more people than Urdu. Are
you reaching out in Pakistan only in the Urdu language or are
you equally reaching out to Punjabi and Sindhi and Baloch, for
that matter, or do you know? If you don't know, tell me you
don't know, and I will make you answer for the record.
Mr. Hartung. Through Rewards for Justice, we reach out in
all languages in Pakistan. Now, we do not have a program
specifically----
Mr. Sherman. It can't be all languages.
Mr. Hartung. Well, not--the main primary languages.
Mr. Sherman. So you are doing as much in Punjabi and Sindhi
as you are doing in Urdu?
Mr. Hartung. Well, let me backtrack a little bit. We do not
have a post-specific program in Pakistan, but we do have a
program----
Mr. Sherman. What does it mean you don't have a post-
specific program?
Mr. Hartung. Well, in some countries, like Afghanistan, we
have partnered with the government to undertake an
advertisement campaign in that country. We have not done that
in Pakistan.
Mr. Sherman. So you are saying you don't advertise in
Pakistan because----
Mr. Hartung. No.
Mr. Sherman. Or you just don't--it is just not a
cooperative effort?
Mr. Hartung. We advertise as far as our global program.
Mr. Sherman. What are you doing to advertise in Pakistan
and in what languages?
Mr. Hartung. I know we push information on our Web site in
the primary languages. I can get you the information about how
that is divided up and into what languages.
Mr. Sherman. Other than Web site, what are we doing to
inform Pakistanis?
Mr. Hartung. We do not have a program in Pakistan, sir.
Mr. Sherman. Wow.
Mr. Hartung. In order to----
Mr. Sherman. Is there a country where there are more--well,
I guess you could also argue about Iran. But can you name many
countries where there are more terrorists bent on killing
Americans?
Mr. Hartung. In order to have that program in Pakistan, we
need the permission of the Government of Pakistan to operate
within that country.
Mr. Sherman. Have we asked--okay, have we publicized to the
American people that a country getting over $1 billion in
American aid is prohibiting us from distributing matchbooks?
Mr. Hartung. I am not aware of that, sir.
Mr. Sherman. Well, perhaps this hearing could illustrate
that and could be added to the list of things we would expect
to change. What formal action has been taken to ask the
Pakistani Government, if not for their help, at least for their
permission to buy advertising in local media outlets, to
distribute matchbooks or whatever? Can you tell me what has
been asked for?
Mr. Hartung. I do not have that information.
Mr. Sherman. Okay, so the first question for the record is
in what languages do you have the Web page, which, you know, I
know the whole world is being wired, but you are here showing
us the matchbooks. These guys are all dead. The guys that are
still alive are mostly in Pakistan, and you don't do the
matchbooks in Pakistan. So you will want to respond for the
record.
Have we hit--have we pushed the Pakistanis hard? Have
they--is it illegal for us to distribute matchbooks in
Pakistan? If so, are we doing it in other languages?
Speaking of matchbooks, I assume that these were in Arabic
as well?
Mr. Hartung. That is correct.
Mr. Sherman. Okay. Now, it occurs to me and everyone that
folks getting these rewards might find their country of origin
to be a dangerous place. Does the State Department have the
legal authority to provide visas as part of the reward, visas
to live in the United States?
Mr. Hartung. All of our rewards, the information that is
advertised indicates that we are willing to relocate the person
who provides us the information or family members if it is
determined that their lives may be in danger. We have worked--
--
Mr. Sherman. But there is no guarantee that if you provide
the information, the State Department will reach that
conclusion. Let's say you do determine that their lives are in
danger and you find that no other country wants to give them
refuge, do you have the authority to give them permanent visas
to live in the United States?
Mr. Hartung. We have actually had cases where we have
worked with, for example, with the FBI and the Department of
Justice where visas have been issued to the individuals who
have provided us information.
Mr. Sherman. But if we really provided the fine print on
the Web site the way you would in a securities offering, we
would have to asterisk and say whether or not we help you avoid
death is subject to our sole determination as to whether you
are in danger, and whether or not we can let you live in the
United States, even if we think that is necessary for your
protection, is subject to the determination of other agencies.
I don't recommend necessarily that you put that on the Web
site, but are both those statements true?
Mr. Hartung. We work--the examples I gave are other
agencies that we have worked with that we have issued for those
individuals to come to the United States.
Mr. Sherman. But, first, if the person feels they are going
to get killed and you don't agree with them, they are not
getting a visa, even if they are getting the reward; and even
if you think they are going to get killed, if you can't
persuade other agencies to give them a visa, they are not
getting a visa.
Mr. Hartung. No, the visa would be issued by the Department
of State.
Mr. Sherman. Okay. So you work with those other agencies--
--
Mr. Hartung. We do work with them.
Mr. Sherman. But you have the final determination; if
somebody convinces State that they are going to get killed, you
have the authority to do that?
Mr. Hartung. We have our Intergovernment Rewards Committee
that is made up of various U.S. Government agencies, law
enforcement, intelligence, military, DoD, and that information
is discussed, and that determination is made.
Mr. Sherman. Please get back to me soon on Pakistan, how
hard have we pushed? What is the official slam the door, not
just to cooperation, but even to allowing us? I mean, I can buy
an ad in a Pakistani newspaper selling a motorcycle, but
apparently, you can't buy one selling a reward. And so let's
see, what have we asked for? What has been the response? How
hard have we pushed? And what languages are we doing this Web
site in, although if it is just a Web site, it is pretty much a
secondary question? I yield back. I thank the chairman for the
additional time.
Mr. Royce. We appreciate that.
If we go to the Basic Authorities Act, Section 36,
paragraph (e)(5), the sense of it, as written, is if the
Secretary determines that the identity of the recipient of the
reward or members of the recipient's immediate family must be
protected, the Secretary may take such measures in connection
with the payment of the reward as the Secretary considers
necessary to effect such protection. But it is my understanding
that in the past, there are a number of cases where that, in
fact, has taken place, but as we work out the final language,
if there is any additional thoughts on that, we would be happy
to work with the department.
Let's go to Mr. Connolly for his questions.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hartung or Ambassador Rapp--and welcome to all three of
you--were any of these programs used in the identification of
the location of Osama bin Laden?
Mr. Hartung. The Rewards for Justice was not. I mean, we
advertised through Rewards for Justice, but we did not pay a
reward for information concerning Osama bin Laden.
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Ambassador? You have no additional
information?
Ambassador Rapp. Nothing, no further information.
Mr. Connolly. Ms. Darby, with respect to the program under
your purview, obviously, we are growing increasingly anxious
about what is happening in northern Mexico, the southern part
of our border, with respect to narcotics traffickers and
uncontained violence, violence against public officials, law
enforcement officials with impunity. Has your program been used
in a situation in northern Mexico, and if so, how so?
Ms. Darby. Without getting into too much information on
specific cases, I can tell you we certainly have used rewards.
We have paid rewards and promoted, publicized rewards that have
resulted in the bringing to justice of Mexican drug
traffickers, for example Javier Arellano Felix, head of one of
the most violent criminal drug trafficking organizations in
Mexico, was the subject of one of our rewards and was brought
to justice. So, yes, absolutely, sir.
Mr. Connolly. And presumably, we are coordinating with the
Mexican Government in the utilization of this program, among
other levels of cooperation.
Ms. Darby. I don't know the specifics of that, sir. I
imagine that is the case, but we will get back to you with more
detailed information on that.
Mr. Connolly. I would appreciate that. Because it seems to
me if one were just looking at the situation and one was aware
of your program, this rewards program, one would think it could
be a very useful tool in the kit bag. So I think we would like
to know a lot more about, well, how, without in any way
jeopardizing ongoing activities, but in general is it, in fact,
effectively being deployed and, candidly, could it be expanded,
because I think there would be, again, a fair amount of
receptivity up here to doing just that given what is happening
on our southern border?
Ambassador Rapp, you talked about a range of between $5
million and $25 million depending on certain circumstances in
your testimony.
Ambassador Rapp. What I said is our rewards have basically
been between--the ones that I have dealt with in the last 2
years, the 14, we have made an evaluation basically looking at
$5 million as the maximum, and we have--and these have involved
like 12 different fugitives, 14 rewards paid. We made an
evaluation in terms of the level of the person that was being
brought in, the risk, et cetera, and made the award
accordingly. And, as I said, as we publicized the program and
as it has been discussed at some length, we have viewed it as a
$5-million program. We understand that we could have the
capacity in the truly extraordinary case to go to $25 million.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. And you have sort of answered my
question, which is, how does one decide the range? You look at
seriousness of the target and risk involved and so forth?
Ambassador Rapp. You know, it is an--I mean, to some
extent, some of the ones that we have had most recently have
involved relatively lower level Rwandan individuals, certainly
alleged to be responsible for very, very serious crimes, and
then, you know, if we were--right now, for instance, there are
three high-value fugitives of the Rwandan tribunal, the former
head of the presidential guard, Protais Mpiranya, Felicien
Kabuga, who was the head of hate radio, the chairman of it and
the alleged financier of the genocide, the former minister of
defense. If those individuals are brought in, they would be
potentially higher value because of the crimes for which they
are alleged and the level of responsibility they had. And then
we would look at how much risk the individual took, what kind
of risk they have, what kind of things they did in terms of it.
There are seven factors under our analysis as we come up with a
number.
Mr. Connolly. Very helpful. Perhaps you could give us those
seven factors for the record.
In the very brief period of time I have left, I wonder if
you could just--let's say I am in the bush with Joe Kony and I
somehow hear about this program and I want to do the right
thing, and I want to help bring Joe Kony to justice. I am a
member of the LRA, and I am far away from the capital city
perhaps and modern communications. Can you walk me through,
what would such an individual have to do? What would be the
process whereby that person might try to participate in the
program and help us in our mutual goals?
Ambassador Rapp. Well, obviously, to the extent you have
people that are truly being compelled against their will as
slaves and they have no access outside, indeed, it could be
difficult. But people do periodically escape from Joseph Kony's
control, that is one of the ways that we obtain some
intelligence now. Now you have got another reason to get away
when you hear about this and to reach places where you could
make a phone contact with the sort of information that we would
then provide to you, the sort of contact information that we
provided in the case of the Yugoslavian and Rwandan tribunals,
numbers you could call, that kind of thing. People do have
access to cell phones even in some very remote areas of Africa.
So there are ways to do that. And that information could be
certainly then acted upon much more quickly because of this
operation in which we are providing advisers in cooperation
with the governments out there and helping with intelligence
and logistics in order to be able to operate on that quickly
and potentially get an arrest.
Of course, our program is focused on arrests and transfer
and eventual conviction, this we will pay if Mr. Kony or the
other two commanders that are alive and that are also indicted
are brought to justice, and then we will evaluate what it is
worth. First, of course, I should note that if we do get the
expansion that is proposed here, we will be making a
determination about these other courts. In the past, we have
just said anybody indicted by the Yugoslavia tribunal, Rwandan
tribunal, we will pay a reward of some kind or another. If we
get this authority, obviously, we are going to have to deal
with whether we want to pay it in all ICC cases, in some ICC
cases, whether the Bosnia war crimes court has some fugitives
there that is a mixed chamber that we can pay in. We will make
that determination in the committee. Then we will publicize it.
Then we will provide the access in ways that people can use it.
And then if we get success, we will pay it.
Mr. Connolly. If the chair would allow one follow-up
question, and hopefully it is a relatively brief answer, but
how does it work operationally vis-a-vis the State Department
here and the folks on the ground in Embassies and consulates
abroad? Are they actively promoting this program, and do they
make material available in whatever the local language may be,
or do they leave that up to sort of headquarters?
Ambassador Rapp. Well, I mean, we are involved with
developing the materials and have contracts and work with
people that can advise us on the most effective ways to do
that, but I do want to salute Mr. Hartung's agency, the
Diplomatic Security Bureau. We work very closely in all of our
Embassies with the regional security officers, and those people
are, frankly, in half a dozen Embassies regularly receiving
information in our Rwanda program and evaluating and following
it up and really then providing the real legwork in making this
program work.
So it is in Washington, but it is out in the field, and
then whenever I am in an area where there may be fugitives, we
are doing everything we can to show the posters, to interview
about it, to talk about the fact that this is a real program
and people are being paid.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you so much.
And Mr. Chairman, thank you for your indulgence, a very
interesting topic, and I look forward to working with you on
it.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Mr. Connolly.
Ambassador, if we went back to the circumstances that we
are talking about right now with respect to Joseph Kony, you
have a situation where he has been indicted, where we have now
passed legislation creating the wherewithal to bring him to
justice, where we have passed legislation on disarmament,
demobilization, reintegration. And one of the aspects of this
that is interesting is the fact that there are increasingly
ever larger numbers of defections.
Now, if we turn back the clock to when he started as a war
lord, there are a total of 65,000 children that he has
abducted, but it is the use of technologies like mutilation
that make him so feared, that create an environment in which
people are fearful of coming forward. So if we create an
incentive for people and if they know as part of this
legislation that they and their immediate families will be
protected, if they also know that these defections are on the
increase so that they are not alone, they can see the fact that
the day will come when Kony and the other senior commanders are
brought to the bar of justice, then there is more than one
reason why this program could be effective. I thought you might
speak to the thoughts of the State Department in this and also
the Department of Defense, which right now are working
directly, under the legislation that we passed out of this
committee, working directly with the Ugandan forces in order to
retire this Lord's Resistance Army from the field and tell us
why they are enthusiastic about these changes in the
legislation which we seek to make with this bill.
Ambassador Rapp. Well, I think you are quite correct, Mr.
Chairman, that there are a lot of defections, there is a public
campaign going on encouraging people to leave Kony. This would
add, I think, a critical element in that because at the moment,
if people defect, they are interested in their own situation.
Obviously, they want to take advantage of perhaps going back to
Uganda and perhaps not--having amnesty under the Ugandan law.
They are looking out for their own interests after the horrible
experience they have been through. This would add an element
there where there would be a great incentive for them to
provide information on where Kony was, what his favorite spots
are, where he is likely to move, and to--and by doing that, if
that leads to his arrest, give themselves the opportunity for
substantial reward that can truly change the life of themselves
and their family, and indeed as we note, I mean, if people are
going to be at risk, we can work to relocate them, and we have
worked in a variety of ways, sometimes not relocation to our
country, but to other places with the other reward programs
that we have, and so we would--this would, I think, provide a
real incentive to gather that information, to bring something
useful in, and then for us to operate on it. And I think, as
you note, AFRICOM, which is working on this in support of this
military adviser mission in which we are partnering with
regional forces, is extremely supportive of this legislation.
And I think it could help make this operation a success.
And in the case of Kony--I mean, there are other movements,
where you may take out two or three people, and then somebody
else pops up. I really do think if you take out Kony and these
key commanders, that is the end of the LRA. This is a critical
thing that we need to do.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Ambassador.
Ms. Darby, did you want to make any remarks on that
subject?
Ms. Darby. I would just say that the U.S. Law enforcement
community is very excited about the prospect of having this
tool. They have seen how effective the Narcotics Rewards
Program, in particular, has been in helping them to capture
criminals, bring them to justice, and they are very excited
about the opportunity that is presented in your legislation.
Mr. Royce. Thank you. I think this is an issue we can solve
if we persevere on it.
I want to thank our witnesses for appearing here today.
I want also to mention, without objection, that members may
have 5 legislative days to submit their statements and
questions, and if you don't mind responding to any additional
questions, that would be appreciated. So this hearing now
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:11 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
