This chapter in the book on transnational inquiries and the protection of fundamental rights in criminal proceedings takes into account the particular, and perhaps unique situation in the United States (US) following the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. It explores the laws regulating inquiries by foreign governments who seek evidence in the US to use in criminal proceedings overseas, but primarily the protections recognized by US statutes and jurisprudence when US officials gather evidence abroad. In this respect, the chapter focuses on protections during interrogations, searches, interceptions of confidential communications, and examinations of witnesses and explores when the protection differs, depending on whether the target of the investigative measure is a US-, or non US-citizen, or whether the investigating officials are part of the criminal justice apparatus or belong to the military or the intelligence community. Finally, the chapter explores the admissibility of evidence gathered in the same areas, depending on whether it is used in the normal civilian criminal courts, or in the newly constituted military commissions instituted for trial of foreigners accused of international terrorism.


International Tribunal International Terrorism Fourth Amendment Degrading Treatment Military Commission 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Attorney General


American Service-Members’ Protection Act


Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment


Central Intelligence Agency


Classified Information Protection Act




Combatant Status Review Tribunal


Department of Defense


Department of Justice


Detention Treatment Act 2005


Federal Bureau of Investigation


Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act


Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure


International Criminal Court


International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda


International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia


Khalid Sheikh Mohammed


Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty


North Atlantic Treaty Organization


United States Code


United States Supreme Court


  1. Abrams N (2008) Anti-terrorism and criminal enforcement, 3rd edn. West, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  2. Elsea J (2006) U.S. policy regarding the International Criminal Court, Cong. Research Service, Washington.
  3. Elsea J (2009) International Criminal Court cases in Africa: status and policy issues, Cong. Research Serv.: Washington.
  4. Godinho J (2003) The surrender agreements between the US and the ICTY and ICTR: a critical view. J Int Crim Justice 1:502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jehl D, Johnston D (2005), Rule change lets C.I.A. freely send suspects abroad to jails, NY Times, 6 March. 1cc93f4f41f5156b&ei=5094&partner=homepage
  6. LaFave WR, Israel JH, King NJ, Kerr OS (2009) Criminal procedure, 5th edn. West, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  7. Mayer J (2010) The trial, New Yorker, 15 & 22 Feb., pp 52–63Google Scholar
  8. Pincus W (2009) Clinton’s goals detailed, Wash. Post, 19 Jan.
  9. Ribando C (2006) Article 98 agreements and sanctions on U.S. foreign aid to Latin America, Cong. Research Service, Washington.
  10. Risen J, Johnston D, Lewis NA (2004) Harsh C.I.A. methods cited in top Qaeda interrogations, NY Times, 13 May, A1Google Scholar
  11. Savage C (2009) Obama’s war on terror may resemble Bush’s in some areas, NY Times, 18 Feb., A20Google Scholar
  12. Savage C (2011) Delayed Miranda warning ordered for terror suspects, NY Times, 25 March, A14Google Scholar
  13. Shane S, Mazzetti M, Cooper H (2009) Obama reverses key Bush security policies, NY Times, 23 Jan., A16Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawSaint Louis UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations