Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287
Articles
Brazil
Sri Lanka
United Kingdom
Sweden
00. Editorial
United States
Latin America
Egypt
Jordan
Yemen
Thailand
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
2011/05/25
2011/05/26
2011/05/27
2011/05/28
2011/05/29
2011/05/30
2011/05/31
2011/06/01
2011/06/02
2011/06/03
2011/06/04
2011/06/05
2011/06/06
2011/06/07
2011/06/08
2011/06/09
2011/06/10
2011/06/11
2011/06/12
2011/06/13
2011/06/14
2011/06/15
2011/06/16
2011/06/17
2011/06/18
2011/06/19
2011/06/20
2011/06/21
2011/06/22
2011/06/23
2011/06/24
2011/06/25
2011/06/26
2011/06/27
2011/06/28
2011/06/29
2011/06/30
2011/07/01
2011/07/02
2011/07/04
2011/07/05
2011/07/06
2011/07/07
2011/07/08
2011/07/10
2011/07/11
2011/07/12
2011/07/13
2011/07/14
2011/07/15
2011/07/16
2011/07/17
2011/07/18
2011/07/19
2011/07/20
2011/07/21
2011/07/22
2011/07/23
2011/07/25
2011/07/27
2011/07/28
2011/07/29
2011/07/31
2011/08/01
2011/08/02
2011/08/03
2011/08/05
2011/08/06
2011/08/07
2011/08/08
2011/08/10
2011/08/11
2011/08/12
2011/08/13
2011/08/15
2011/08/16
2011/08/17
2011/08/19
2011/08/21
2011/08/22
2011/08/23
2011/08/24
2011/08/25
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Antananarivo
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Alexandria
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embasy Bonn
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Brazzaville
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangui
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Belfast
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Cotonou
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chiang Mai
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Chengdu
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
DIR FSINFATC
Consulate Dusseldorf
Consulate Durban
Consulate Dubai
Consulate Dhahran
Embassy Guatemala
Embassy Grenada
Embassy Georgetown
Embassy Gaborone
Consulate Guayaquil
Consulate Guangzhou
Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Hong Kong
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kolonia
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Krakow
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Consulate Kaduna
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Lusaka
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lome
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy Libreville
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Leipzig
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Mission Geneva
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Mogadishu
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maseru
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Merida
Consulate Melbourne
Consulate Matamoros
Consulate Marseille
Embassy Nouakchott
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Nuevo Laredo
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Consulate Nagoya
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Praia
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Moresby
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Podgorica
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Ponta Delgada
Consulate Peshawar
REO Mosul
REO Kirkuk
REO Hillah
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Surabaya
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy Tirana
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
Consulate Thessaloniki
USUN New York
USMISSION USTR GENEVA
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Mission CD Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
US Delegation FEST TWO
UNVIE
UN Rome
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vientiane
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AF
ADANA
ASEC
AFIN
AMGT
AE
AORC
AID
AR
AO
AU
ASEAN
AGOA
AFGHANISTAN
AFFAIRS
AMED
APER
ASECARP
APEC
AEMR
AS
AA
ANET
AFLU
ABLD
AL
ASUP
AJ
APECO
AMER
ABUD
AODE
AM
AFSN
AESC
AND
AG
ALOW
AROC
AVIANFLU
ATRN
ACOA
AEGR
AMGMT
AADP
AFSI
ACABQ
APRM
AZ
AIDS
ASE
AGAO
ADCO
ABDALLAH
ARF
AIDAC
ACOTA
ASCH
AC
ASEG
AGR
ACS
AMCHAMS
AN
AMIA
ASIG
ADPM
ADB
ANARCHISTS
ALOWAR
ARM
AUC
AINF
AINT
AORG
AY
AVIAN
AMEDCASCKFLO
AK
ARSO
ARABBL
ASO
ANTITERRORISM
ARABL
AOWC
AGRICULTURE
ALJAZEERA
AMTC
AFINM
AOCR
ABER
ARR
AFPK
ASSEMBLY
ASSK
AZE
AORCYM
AINR
AGMT
AEC
ACKM
APRC
AIN
ASCC
AFPREL
ASED
APERTH
ASFC
ASECTH
AFSA
AOMS
AORCO
ANTXON
ARC
AFAF
ADIP
AIAG
AFARI
AEMED
AORL
AX
ASECAF
AOPC
ASECAFIN
AFZAL
APCS
AMB
AGUIRRE
AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL
AIT
ARCH
AMEX
ALI
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AORCD
AVIATION
ARAS
AINFCY
ACBAQ
AOPR
AREP
ALEXANDER
ATRD
AEIR
AOIC
ABLDG
ASEX
AFR
ASCE
ATRA
ASEK
AER
ALOUNI
AMCT
AVERY
APR
AMAT
AEMRS
ASPA
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ALL
AECL
ACAO
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORD
AFL
AME
ADM
ASECPHUM
AGIT
ABT
ASECVE
AGUILAR
AT
ABMC
ALZUGUREN
ANGEL
ASR
ANTONIO
BMGT
BEXP
BM
BG
BL
BA
BR
BTA
BO
BY
BBSR
BLUE
BK
BF
BTIO
BELLVIEW
BE
BU
BN
BH
BD
BC
BTC
BILAT
BT
BX
BRUSSELS
BP
BB
BRPA
BUSH
BURMA
BMENA
BESP
BIT
BBG
BGD
BMEAID
BAGHDAD
BEN
BIO
BMOT
BWC
BLUNT
BURNS
BUT
BGMT
BAIO
BCW
BOEHNER
BFIF
BOL
BASHAR
BIMSTEC
BOU
BIDEN
BZ
BFIN
BTRA
BI
BHUM
BOIKO
BERARDUCCI
BOUCHAIB
BORDER
BEXPC
BTIU
BTT
BIOS
BEXB
BGPGOV
BOND
BLR
CE
CG
CH
CVR
CASC
CU
CI
CD
CO
CDG
CB
CJAN
CPAS
COM
CVIS
CMGT
CT
CENTCOM
CNARC
CTERR
COUNTER
CHIEF
CDC
CTR
CBW
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CY
CA
CM
CS
CWC
CN
CITES
CF
CWG
CIVS
CFIS
CASCC
CROATIA
CONS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CASA
COE
CJ
CHR
CODEL
CR
CBC
CACS
CHERTOFF
CAS
CONTROL
CONDITIONS
CONDOLEEZZA
CITEL
CV
CLINTON
CHG
CZ
CON
CTBT
CEN
CRIMES
COMMERCE
CLOK
CRISTINA
CFED
CARC
CND
CTM
CARICOM
COUNTRYCLEARANCE
CBTH
CHINA
CSW
CICTE
CJUS
CYPRUS
CW
CAMBODIA
CENSUS
CIDA
CRIME
CBG
CBE
CMGMT
CAIO
CEC
CARSON
CPCTC
CEDAW
COMESA
CVIA
CWCM
CEA
COSI
CAPC
CGEN
COPUOS
CGOPRC
COETRD
CKGR
CFE
CQ
CITT
CIC
CARIB
CVIC
CLO
CAFTA
CVISU
CHRISTOPHER
CACM
CIAT
CDB
CIS
CUL
CHAO
CNC
CL
CSEP
COMMAND
CENTER
COL
CAN
CAJC
CUIS
CONSULAR
CLMT
CIA
CBSA
CEUDA
CAC
CROS
CIO
CPUOS
CKOR
CVPR
CONG
CONTROLS
CEPTER
CVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGKIRF
CDCE
DPOL
DEMARCHE
DHS
DR
DA
DISENGAGEMENT
DEMOCRATIC
DEFENSE
DJ
DY
DARFUR
DHRF
DEA
DTRO
DPRK
DO
DARFR
DOC
DRL
DK
DOJ
DTRA
DOMESTIC
DAC
DOD
DEAX
DIEZ
DEOC
DELTAVIOLENCE
DCOM
DMINE
DRC
DCG
DPKO
DOMESTICPOLITICS
DE
DB
DOT
DEPT
DOE
DHLAKAMA
DHSX
DS
DKEM
DAO
DCM
DANIEL
DEM
DAVID
DCRM
ETRD
EAGR
ETTC
EAID
ECON
EFIN
ECIN
EINV
ELAB
EAIR
ENRG
EPET
EWWT
ECPS
EIND
EMIN
ELTN
EC
ETMIN
EUC
EZ
ET
ELECTIONS
ENVR
EU
EUN
EG
EINT
ER
ECONOMICS
ES
EMS
ENIV
EEB
EN
ECE
ECOSOC
EK
ENVIRONMENT
EFIS
EI
EWT
ENGRD
ECPSN
EXIM
EIAD
ERIN
ECPC
EDEV
ENGY
ECTRD
EPA
ESTH
ECCT
EINVECON
ENGR
ERTD
EUR
EAP
EWWC
ELTD
EL
EXIMOPIC
EXTERNAL
ETRDEC
ESCAP
ECO
EGAD
ELNT
ECONOMIC
ENV
ETRN
EIAR
EUMEM
ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID
EREL
ECOM
ECONETRDEAGRJA
ETCC
ETRG
ECONOMY
EMED
ETR
ENERG
EITC
EFINOECD
EURM
EENG
ERA
EXPORT
ENRD
ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC
EGEN
EBRD
EVIN
ETRAD
ECOWAS
EFTA
ECONETRDBESPAR
EGOVSY
EPIN
EID
ECONENRG
EDRC
ESENV
ETT
EB
ENER
ELTNSNAR
ECHEVARRIA
ETRC
EPIT
EDUC
ESA
EFI
ENRGY
ESCI
EE
EAIDXMXAXBXFFR
EETC
ECIP
EIAID
EIVN
EBEXP
ESTN
EING
EGOV
ETRA
EPETEIND
ELAN
ETRDGK
EAIDRW
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
EPEC
ENVI
ELN
EAG
EPCS
EPRT
EPTED
ETRB
EUM
EAIDS
EFIC
EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM
EAIDAR
ESF
EIDN
ELAM
EDU
EV
EAIDAF
ECN
EDA
EXBS
EINTECPS
ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ
EPREL
EAC
EINVEFIN
ETA
EAGER
EINDIR
ECA
ECLAC
ELAP
EITI
EUCOM
ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID
EARG
ELDIN
EINVKSCA
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EFINTS
ECCP
ETC
EAIRASECCASCID
EINN
ETRP
EAIDNI
EFQ
ECOQKPKO
EGPHUM
EBUD
ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ
ENERGY
ELB
EINDETRD
EMI
ECONEFIN
EIB
EURN
ETRDEINVTINTCS
EIN
EFIM
ETIO
ELAINE
EMN
EATO
EWTR
EIPR
EINVETC
ETTD
ETDR
EIQ
ECONCS
EPPD
ENRGIZ
EISL
ESPINOSA
ELEC
EAIG
ESLCO
EUREM
ENTG
ERD
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ECINECONCS
ETRO
ETRDECONWTOCS
ECUN
EFND
EPECO
EAIRECONRP
ERGR
ETRDPGOV
ECPN
ENRGMO
EPWR
EET
EAIS
EAGRE
EDUARDO
EAGRRP
EAIDPHUMPRELUG
EICN
ECONQH
EVN
EGHG
ELBR
EINF
EAIDHO
EENV
ETEX
ERNG
ED
FR
FREEDOM
FINREF
FJ
FI
FRELIMO
FOREIGN
FAA
FETHI
FAS
FTAA
FRB
FAO
FCS
FINANCE
FWS
FTA
FEMA
FDA
FLU
FRANCISCO
FBI
FORCE
FO
FARC
FK
FT
FCSC
FAC
FM
FMGT
FINV
FCSCEG
FARM
FERNANDO
FINR
FIN
FINE
FIR
FDIC
FOR
FOI
FCUL
FKLU
FMLN
FISO
FIXED
GM
GMUS
GG
GR
GE
GAZA
GT
GH
GZ
GJ
GLOBAL
GV
GABY
GOI
GA
GCC
GB
GY
GATT
GC
GUAM
GEORGE
GTIP
GOV
GOMEZ
GUTIERREZ
GL
GKGIC
GF
GU
GWI
GARCIA
GTMO
GN
GANGS
GIPNC
GAERC
GREGG
GUILLERMO
GASPAR
GERARD
GI
HK
HR
HUMANR
HUMAN
HO
HA
HUMANRIGHTS
HU
HHS
HIV
HUM
HRKAWC
HILLEN
HILLARY
HDP
HUMRIT
HSTC
HUMANITARIAN
HCOPIL
HADLEY
HURI
HL
HRETRD
HOURANI
HG
HARRIET
HESHAM
HI
HNCHR
HARRY
HRECON
HRC
HOSTAGES
HEBRON
HUMOR
HSWG
HYMPSK
HECTOR
HN
HYDE
HUD
HRPGOV
HIGHLIGHTS
ID
ILC
IS
IZ
ICAO
IMO
ITU
IR
IAEA
ICRC
IPROP
IT
IBRD
ISRAELI
IRAQI
ISSUES
ITRA
IV
IO
IGAD
IRAQ
IN
IMF
ICTR
ISCON
IADB
IDB
IEA
INR
IWC
ICCAT
ILO
INMARSAT
IOM
ICJ
IQ
ISPA
ITRD
IPR
INTELSAT
ISN
IAHRC
INTERNAL
IFAD
IICA
IHO
IRAN
IL
IRCE
IC
INTELLECTUAL
IRM
IE
ICTY
IDLI
IFO
ISCA
INF
INL
ISRAEL
INV
IBB
INFLUENZA
ISPL
ITER
ITIA
INRA
ISAF
IACHR
INTERPOL
IFR
IRS
INRB
IEF
ISAAC
ICC
INDO
IIP
IATTC
INAUGURATION
IND
INS
IZPREL
IACI
IEFIN
INNP
ILAB
IA
IMTS
ITALY
ITALIAN
IFIN
IRAJ
IX
ICG
IF
ITPHUM
ITA
IP
IACW
IK
IUCN
IZEAID
IRPE
IDA
ISLAMISTS
ITF
INRO
IBET
IDP
IRC
ISO
ICES
IRMO
ITPGOV
IQNV
IMSO
IRDB
IMET
INCB
IFRC
JA
JO
JP
JM
JCIC
JOHN
JE
JEFFERY
JS
JUS
JN
JOHNNIE
JAMES
JKUS
JOSEPH
JML
JAWAD
JSRP
JIMENEZ
JOSE
JKJUS
JK
JAPAN
KMDR
KPAO
KPKO
KJUS
KCRM
KGHG
KFRD
KWMN
KDEM
KTFN
KHIV
KGIC
KIDE
KSCA
KNNP
KHUM
KIPR
KSUM
KISL
KIRF
KCOR
KRCM
KPAL
KWBG
KN
KS
KOMC
KSEP
KFLU
KPWR
KTIA
KSEO
KMPI
KHLS
KICC
KSTH
KMCA
KVPR
KPRM
KE
KU
KZ
KFLO
KSAF
KTIP
KTEX
KBCT
KOCI
KOLY
KOR
KAWC
KACT
KUNR
KTDB
KSTC
KLIG
KSKN
KNN
KCFE
KCIP
KGHA
KHDP
KPOW
KUNC
KDRL
KV
KPREL
KCRS
KPOL
KRVC
KRIM
KGIT
KWIR
KT
KIRC
KOMO
KRFD
KUWAIT
KG
KFIN
KSCI
KTFIN
KFTN
KGOV
KPRV
KSAC
KGIV
KCRIM
KPIR
KSOC
KBIO
KW
KGLB
KMWN
KPO
KFSC
KSEAO
KSTCPL
KSI
KPRP
KREC
KFPC
KUNH
KCSA
KMRS
KNDP
KR
KICCPUR
KPPAO
KCSY
KTBT
KCIS
KNEP
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KNNB
KGCC
KINR
KPOP
KMFO
KENV
KNAR
KVIR
KDRG
KDMR
KFCE
KNAO
KDEN
KGCN
KICA
KIMMITT
KMCC
KLFU
KMSG
KSEC
KUM
KCUL
KMNP
KSMT
KCOM
KOMCSG
KSPR
KPMI
KRAD
KIND
KCRP
KAUST
KWAWC
KTER
KCHG
KRDP
KPAS
KITA
KTSC
KPAOPREL
KWGB
KIRP
KJUST
KMIG
KLAB
KTFR
KSEI
KSTT
KAPO
KSTS
KLSO
KWNN
KPOA
KHSA
KNPP
KPAONZ
KBTS
KWWW
KY
KJRE
KPAOKMDRKE
KCRCM
KSCS
KWMNCI
KESO
KWUN
KPLS
KIIP
KEDEM
KPAOY
KRIF
KGICKS
KREF
KTRD
KFRDSOCIRO
KTAO
KJU
KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW
KEN
KO
KNEI
KEMR
KKIV
KEAI
KWAC
KRCIM
KWCI
KFIU
KWIC
KCORR
KOMS
KNNO
KPAI
KBWG
KTTB
KTBD
KTIALG
KILS
KFEM
KTDM
KESS
KNUC
KPA
KOMCCO
KCEM
KRCS
KWBGSY
KNPPIS
KNNPMNUC
KWN
KERG
KLTN
KALM
KCCP
KSUMPHUM
KREL
KGH
KLIP
KTLA
KAWK
KWMM
KVRP
KVRC
KAID
KSLG
KDEMK
KX
KIF
KNPR
KCFC
KFTFN
KTFM
KPDD
KCERS
KMOC
KDEMAF
KMEPI
KEMS
KDRM
KEPREL
KBTR
KEDU
KNP
KIRL
KNNR
KMPT
KISLPINR
KTPN
KA
KJUSTH
KPIN
KDEV
KTDD
KAKA
KFRP
KWNM
KTSD
KINL
KJUSKUNR
KWWMN
KECF
KWBC
KPRO
KVBL
KOM
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KEDM
KFLD
KLPM
KRGY
KNNF
KICR
KIFR
KM
KWMNCS
KAWS
KLAP
KPAK
KDDG
KCGC
KID
KNSD
KMPF
KPFO
KDP
KCMR
KRMS
KNPT
KNNNP
KTIAPARM
KDTB
KNUP
KPGOV
KNAP
KNNC
KUK
KSRE
KREISLER
KIVP
KQ
KTIAEUN
KPALAOIS
KRM
KISLAO
KWM
KFLOA
LE
LU
LH
LA
LG
LO
LY
LANTERN
LI
LABOR
LORAN
LTTE
LT
LAS
LAB
LAW
LVPR
LARREA
LEBIK
LAURA
LS
LOTT
LOVE
LR
LEON
LAVIN
LGAT
LV
LAOS
LOG
LN
LB
MOPS
MO
MARR
ML
MASS
MZ
MR
MNUC
MX
MV
MCC
MY
MEDIA
MTCRE
MG
MCAP
MOPPS
MP
MI
MK
MC
MD
MA
MU
MASC
MW
MT
MEPP
MN
MTCR
MH
MEPI
MIL
MNUCPTEREZ
MMAR
MICHAEL
MUNC
MDC
MPOS
MONUC
MAR
MGMT
MAS
MEPN
MENDIETA
MARIA
MONTENEGRO
MOOPS
MSG
MARITIME
MURRAY
MUKASEY
MOTO
MCA
MFO
MEX
MRSEC
MMED
MACP
MAAR
MINUSTAH
MCCONNELL
MAPP
MGT
MARQUEZ
MANUEL
MNUR
MCCAIN
MF
MOHAMMAD
MOHAMED
MNU
MFA
MILITANTS
MINORITIES
MTS
MLS
MILI
MIAH
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MED
MARAD
MNVC
MINURSO
MNUCUN
MIK
MARK
MBM
MPP
MILITARY
MAPS
MNUK
MILA
MTRRE
MACEDONIA
MICHEL
MASSMNUC
MUCN
MQADHAFI
MPS
MARRGH
MRCRE
MTRE
MORALES
MAP
MCTRE
MHUC
MOPSGRPARM
MOROCCO
MCAPS
NL
NU
NS
NI
NPT
NATO
NO
NG
NATEU
NSF
NZ
NAS
NP
NDP
NLD
NGO
NEPAD
NAFTA
NASA
NEA
NGUYEN
NIH
NK
NIPP
NONE
NR
NANCY
NEGROPONTE
NRR
NERG
NSSP
NSG
NSFO
NE
NATSIOS
NFSO
NATIONAL
NTDB
NT
NCD
NTSB
NRC
NELSON
NAM
NH
NPG
NEC
NSC
NFATC
NMFS
NATOIRAQ
NAR
NZUS
NARC
NCCC
NA
NC
NEW
NRG
NUIN
NOVO
NATOPREL
NEY
NV
NICHOLAS
NPA
NW
NARCOTICS
NORAD
NOAA
NON
NTTC
NKNNP
NMNUC
NUMBERING
ODIP
OIIP
OPRC
OSCE
OREP
OTRA
OPET
OSCI
OVIP
OECD
OCII
OUALI
OPDC
OEXC
OFPD
OPIC
OFDP
OPCW
OECV
OAS
OM
OMIG
ODAG
OPREP
ORA
OIC
OEXCSCULKPAO
OIG
OASS
OFFICIALS
ORTA
OSAC
OIL
OIE
OEXP
OPEC
OPDAT
OMS
OES
OHI
OMAR
OCRA
OFSO
OCBD
OSTA
OAO
ONA
OTP
ORC
OAU
OXEC
OA
ODPC
OPDP
OVIPPRELUNGANU
OASC
OSHA
OPCD
OTR
OPPI
OPCR
OF
OFDPQIS
OSIC
OHUM
OSTRA
OASCC
OBSP
OFDA
OPICEAGR
OIM
OGAC
OTA
OTRAORP
OPPC
OESC
OCEA
OVP
ON
OPAD
OTAR
OCS
ODC
OTRD
OCED
OSD
ORUE
OREG
PHUM
PINR
PTER
PGOV
PREL
PREF
PL
PM
PHSA
PE
PARM
PINS
PK
PUNE
PO
PALESTINIAN
PU
PBTS
PROP
PTBS
POL
POLI
PA
PGOVZI
POLMIL
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POLM
PD
POLITICS
POLICY
PAS
PMIL
PINT
PNAT
PV
PKO
PPOL
PERSONS
PING
PBIO
PH
PETR
PARMS
PRES
PCON
PETERS
PRELBR
PT
PLAB
PP
PAK
PDEM
PKPA
PSOCI
PF
PLO
PTERM
PJUS
PSOE
PELOSI
PROPERTY
PGOVPREL
PARP
PRL
PNIR
PHUMKPAL
PG
PREZ
PGIC
PBOV
PAO
PKK
PROV
PHSAK
PHUMPREL
PROTECTION
PGOVBL
PSI
PRELPK
PGOVENRG
PUM
PRELKPKO
PATTY
PSOC
PRIVATIZATION
PRELSP
PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ
PMIG
PREC
PAIGH
PROG
PSHA
PARK
PETER
POG
PHUS
PPREL
PS
PTERPREL
PRELPGOV
POV
PKPO
PGOVECON
POUS
PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN
PWBG
PMAR
PREM
PAR
PNR
PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO
PARMIR
PGOVGM
PHUH
PARTM
PN
PRE
PTE
PY
POLUN
PPEL
PDOV
PGOVSOCI
PIRF
PGOVPM
PBST
PRELEVU
PGOR
PBTSRU
PRM
PRELKPAOIZ
PGVO
PERL
PGOC
PAGR
PMIN
PHUMR
PVIP
PPD
PGV
PRAM
PINL
PKPAL
PTERE
PGOF
PINO
PHAS
PODC
PRHUM
PHUMA
PREO
PPA
PEPFAR
PGO
PRGOV
PAC
PRESL
PORG
PKFK
PEPR
PRELP
PREFA
PNG
PGOVPHUMKPAO
PRELECON
PINOCHET
PFOR
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
PRELC
PREK
PHUME
PHJM
POLINT
PGOVPZ
PGOVKCRM
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PECON
PEACE
PROCESS
PLN
PRELSW
PAHO
PEDRO
PRELA
PASS
PPAO
PGPV
PNUM
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGIV
PRFE
POGOV
PEL
PBT
PAMQ
PINF
PSEPC
POSTS
PHUMPGOV
PVOV
PHSAPREL
PROLIFERATION
PENA
PRELTBIOBA
PIN
PRELL
PGOVPTER
PHAM
PHYTRP
PTEL
PTERPGOV
PHARM
PROTESTS
PRELAF
PKBL
PRELKPAO
PKNP
PARMP
PHUML
PFOV
PERM
PUOS
PRELGOV
PHUMPTER
PARAGRAPH
PERURENA
PBTSEWWT
PCI
PETROL
PINSO
PINSCE
PQL
PEREZ
PBS
RS
REFUGEES
RW
RP
RELFREE
RO
REGIONAL
RIGHTS
REACTION
REPORT
RU
RENAMO
RIGHTSPOLMIL
REFORM
RM
REFUGEE
REL
RELATIONS
ROW
RREL
REGION
RATIFICATION
RBI
RICE
ROOD
RODENAS
RUIZ
RODHAM
ROBERT
RGY
ROY
REUBEN
RELIGIOUS
RUEHZO
RODRIGUEZ
RUEUN
RELAM
RSP
RF
RSO
RCMP
REO
ROSS
RPTS
RENE
REID
RUPREL
RMA
RI
REMON
RPEL
RFE
RFIN
RA
RAFAEL
RAY
RUS
RPREL
ROBERTG
RECIN
RAMONTEIJELO
SNAR
SP
SN
SMIG
SL
SOCI
SU
SG
SF
SENV
SZ
SOE
SCUL
SY
SO
SR
SYR
SE
SA
SW
SIPDIS
SCIENCE
SADC
SI
SCI
SOCIETY
SC
SAARC
STR
SECRETARY
SANC
SSH
ST
SNA
SGWI
SEP
SOCIS
SETTLEMENTS
SPECIALIST
SK
SHUM
START
STET
SCVL
SREF
SCHUL
SCUIL
SYRIA
SECURITY
SPCE
SYAI
SMIL
SOWGC
STEPHEN
SNRV
SKCA
SENSITIVE
SECI
SNAP
SPP
SCUD
SOM
SPECI
SMIGBG
SENC
SCRM
SGNV
SECTOR
SENVEAGREAIDTBIOECONSOCIXR
SENVSXE
SASIAIN
SACU
SENVSPL
SWMN
STEINBERG
SOPN
SOCR
SCOI
SCRS
SILVASANDE
SWE
SARS
SNARIZ
SUDAN
SENVQGR
SM
SNARKTFN
SAAD
SD
SAN
SIPRNET
STATE
SENS
SUBJECT
SFNV
SECSTATE
SSA
SPCVIS
SOI
SOFA
SCULKPAOECONTU
SPTER
SKSAF
SENVKGHG
SHI
SEVN
SANR
SPSTATE
SMITH
SCOM
SH
SNARCS
SNARN
SIPRS
SNARM
SIPDI
SCPR
SNIG
SELAB
SULLIVAN
SENVENV
SECDEF
SOLIC
SOIC
SPAS
SASC
SOSI
SEC
SEN
SENVCASCEAIDID
TU
TH
TW
TSPA
TRGY
TPHY
TBIO
TIFA
TS
TZ
TX
TSPL
TT
TK
TC
TINT
TERFIN
TERRORISM
TIP
TURKEY
TI
TECHNOLOGY
TNGD
TRSY
TRAFFICKING
TOPEC
TPSL
TP
TD
TR
TA
TIO
TREATY
TO
THPY
TECH
TRADE
TPSA
TG
TAGS
TF
TRAD
THKSJA
TVBIO
TNDG
TN
TBIOZK
TWI
TV
TWL
TRT
TWRO
TSRY
TTPGOV
TAUSCHER
TRBY
TRBIO
TL
TPKO
TIA
TGRY
TSPAM
TREL
TNAR
TBI
TFIN
TPHYPA
TWCH
THOMMA
THOMAS
TERROR
TRY
TBID
TPP
TE
THANH
TJ
TBKIO
UNGA
USUN
UN
UG
UNSC
UK
UP
US
UNCTAD
UNVIE
UNHRC
USTR
UNAMA
UNCRIME
UNESCO
UV
UNDP
UNHCR
UNCSD
UNCHR
UZ
USAID
UNEP
UNO
UNPUOS
UY
UNDC
UNCITRAL
UNAUS
UNCND
UA
UNMIK
USTDA
USEU
USDA
UNICEF
UR
UNFICYP
USNC
USTRRP
UNODC
UNRWA
UNOMIG
USTRPS
USAU
USCC
UNEF
UNGAPL
UNFPA
UNSCE
USSC
UGA
UEU
UNMIC
UNTAC
UNION
UNCLASSIFIED
USPS
UNA
UMIK
USOAS
UNMOVIC
UNFA
UNAIDS
UNCHC
USGS
UNSE
UNRCR
UNTERR
USG
UE
UAE
UNWRA
UNCSW
UNSCR
UNCHS
UNDESCO
UNPAR
UNC
UB
UNSCS
UKXG
UNGACG
UNREST
UNHR
USPTO
UNFCYP
USCG
UNIDROIT
UNSCD
UPU
UNBRO
UNECE
USTRUWR
UNCC
UNESCOSCULPRELPHUMKPALCUIRXFVEKV
VM
VE
VT
VETTING
VN
VZ
VIS
VC
VTPREL
VIP
VTEAID
VTEG
VOA
VA
VTIZ
VANG
VISIT
VO
VENZ
VAT
VI
VEPREL
VEN
WFP
WTO
WHO
WTRO
WBG
WMO
WIPO
WA
WI
WSIS
WHA
WCL
WE
WMN
WEBZ
WS
WAR
WZ
WMD
WW
WILLIAM
WEET
WAEMU
WM
WWBG
WWT
WWARD
WITH
WMDT
WTRQ
WCO
WEU
WALTER
WRTO
WB
WHTI
WBEG
WCI
WEF
WAKI
WHOA
WGC
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 06LIMA2173, PERU: 2006 REPORT ON INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06LIMA2173.
| Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06LIMA2173 | 2006-06-01 16:53 | 2011-08-25 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED | Embassy Lima |
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB
DE RUEHPE #2173/01 1521653
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 011653Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY LIMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0789
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 3484
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 0415
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ JUN SANTIAGO 0598
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 9553
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 2435
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 3364
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 6809
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
UNCLAS LIMA 002173
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR WHA/AND, WHA/EPSC, EB/CBA, EB/IFD/OIA, L/CID
TREASURY FOR OASIA/INL
COMMERCE FOR 4331/MAC/WH/MCAMERON
USTR FOR BHARMAN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV ECON ETRD PGOV PE
SUBJECT: PERU: 2006 REPORT ON INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND
EXPROPRIATION CLAIMS
REF: STATE 60294
This is Post's response to Reftel, a request for input on
outstanding Investment Dispute and Expropriation Claims.
The US Government is aware of seven (7) claims that may be
outstanding against the Government of Peru. Since 2004, 4
cases - Claimants D, E, J, and M - have been resolved and
should be removed from the report. Post also recommends the
removal of 5 cases - Claimants C, F, K, L and O - due to
continued lack of involvement by the claimants.
¶1. a. Claimant A
b. 1999
c. Claimant A's Peruvian subsidiary was a major
purchaser of Peruvian gold in the late 1990's. In
1999, the GOP issued a decree that made the final
purchaser of gold responsible for verifying the
legality of the supply chain from mine to export in
order to receive the refunds of value-added tax (VAT)
allowed under law. On the basis of this decree,
applied retroactively, and in the context of a broader
investigation into the loss of up to $150 million, the
GOP tax authority, SUNAT (Superintendencia Nacional de
Administracion Tributaria), charged that claimant's
subsidiary had participated in a scheme to defraud the
GOP by falsifying gold purchases. SUNAT failed to
refund VAT payments and, in December 1999, executed
letters of guarantee worth a combined $28 million put
up by Claimant A to secure early payment of the
refunds. Claimant A denied the accusations and filed
an administrative appeal, which was later appealed to
Peru's tax court. Subsequently, the GOP filed criminal
charges against executives of claimant's Peruvian
subsidiary.
On February 4, 2003, the tax court ruled against
Claimant A, upholding SUNAT's resolution to withhold
the $28 million amount. The tax court ruling did not
cite any direct evidence of specific misdeeds by
Claimant. However, SUNAT contends that transactions
within Claimant's gold supply chain were simulated and
that the company was in a position to know of the
irregularities and wrongdoings of suppliers.
Claimant A asserts that GOP corruption caused the
execution of the letters of credit and the filing of
criminal charges. Claimant A argues that it should not
be liable for any possible wrongdoing by its gold
suppliers.
The judge in claimant's tax case issued a decision in
May 2004 that threw out previous SUNAT and Tax Court
rulings against the company. The court found that
claimant cannot be held responsible for the irregular
actions of third parties and that the GOP improperly
seized the company's letters of credit in 1999. The
GOP then appealed this decision. The Superior Court,
which heard the appeal, issued a split 2-1 decision in
March 2005, ruling in favor of Claimant A. However,
Peruvian law dictates that the winning side must have a
minimum of three votes in its favor. An additional
judge was assigned to the case in March 2005. After a
hearing in April 2005, the new judge ruled in favor of
the GOP, tying the vote at 2-2. A fifth judge has been
assigned to the case. The Court issued a 3-2 decision
against Claimant A in August 2005.
Claimant appealed to the Constitutional Court. In
January 2006, the Constitutional Court ruled 5-1
against claimant. Claimant is considering taking the
dispute to the Inter-American Court in Costa Rica.
In the criminal case involving claimant's executives
(lumped together with more than 200 other defendants),
the government prosecutor requested that the judge
extend the period to investigate the case (adding 60
more days on to an investigative stage that has
lingered for 3.5 years). In August 2005, the public
prosecutor proposed the dismissal of the case against
the claimant's executives. The Court sent the case
file back to the prosecutor in February 2006 to amend
formal errors before making a decision. In April 2006,
the prosecutor resubmitted his recommendation to the
Criminal Court to dismiss the case against the
Claimant's executives. The Criminal Court will
schedule a hearing for August or September, and should
issue its ruling by December.
At Claimant's request, Embassy has engaged repeatedly
with senior GOP officials since 1999 regarding this
case.
¶2. a. Claimant B
b. 1999
c. Claimant B also is involved in a dispute with the
GOP regarding the refund of value-added tax on gold
exported from Peru between May 1997 and February 1999.
SUNAT, the tax agency, has withheld roughly $600,000
that claimant contends it is entitled to receive as a
tax refund. The Tax Court issued a decision in
Claimant B's case to wait until a parallel criminal
case against Claimant B's local general manager is
resolved. The company has appealed this decision,
arguing that the Tax Court had all the necessary
information to make a ruling and that such a position
creates undue delay. The Superior Court, which heard
the appeal, issued a split 2-1 decision in March 2005
in favor of the government. However, Peruvian law
dictates that the winning side must have a minimum of
three votes in its favor. An additional judge was
assigned to the case and the Superior Court held a
hearing on May 24, 2005. The new judge ruled in favor
of Claimant B, tying the vote at 2-2. A fifth judge
was assigned to the case and the Court held another
oral hearing on June 15, 2005. In August, the Court
issued its decision, 3-2 against Claimant. Claimant
appealed the case to the Constitutional Court, seeking
to overturn the ruling of the Tax Court, which
refrained from issuing a resolution until after the
criminal case concludes.
The criminal case against Claimant B's local general
manager is the same one that involves Claimant A's
executives. The Public Prosecutor did not recommend
that the case against Claimant B's executive be
dropped.
In the September 2002 ATPDEA commitment letter, the GOP
pledged to resolve this case promptly, ensuring due
process and transparency. In communications with GOP
officials, USTR has set progress in the resolution of
this dispute as a key factor that will determine
whether Peru is included in the potential free trade
agreement (FTA) that is sent to Congress.
¶3. a. Claimant C
b. 1989
c. Peru's Supreme Court ruled in December 1989 that
ships belonging to Claimant C had been illegally seized
by Peruvian Customs in 1985, and that Claimant C is due
financial compensation. However, the amount of that
compensation is now the subject of a series of court
actions involving the Ministry of Economy and Finance
(MEF). MEF contested the legality of Claimant C's
claim, stating that the statute of limitations had
expired. The court ruled on March 12, 2004, against
the company on the statute of limitations issue.
Claimant C has appealed this decision to the Superior
Court, which was scheduled to start hearing the case by
August 2004. An independent legal analysis requested
by the Embassy suggested that the lower court ruling
was within the bounds of Peruvian law.
Claimant C passed away in early 2005. His wife has
since moved to the United States and is no longer
seeking Embassy advocacy on this case.
¶4. a. Claimant D
b. 2001
c. This case was resolved in May 2004. Peru's
telecommunications agency, OSIPTEL, sponsored
competitive bidding for a subsidized, rural telephone
network contract in September 2000. Foreign bidders
were required to form a consortium with a Peruvian
partner. On September 28, 2000, OSIPTEL announced that
Claimant D and its Peruvian partner had submitted the
lowest bid (about $27.8 million) for a subsidy. The bid
submitted by Claimant D and its partner was
approximately $10 million less than the second-place
bid. OSIPTEL issued an official resolution (a "Buena
Pro") declaring Claimant D's consortium to be the
winner.
To finalize the contract, Claimant D's partner was
required to obtain a concession from the GOP, which the
Claimant alleges should have been automatic. The GOP
refused to do so, citing indictments against the owners
of the Peruvian partner firm. The GOP awarded the
concession to the second-place bidder in 2001, allowing
the second-place firm to reduce its bid by $10 million
to match claimant's bid. Claimant D alleged that the
decision to award the concession to the second-place
bidder was prompted by that bidder's close contacts
with former senior GOP officials. Claimant D alleged
that the GOP violated several of Peru's own laws and
regulations.
Working on the basis of guidance from the Department,
Embassy officers engaged actively with GOP officials to
encourage the GOP to investigate the claimant's
allegations and to consider an out-of-court settlement.
This case was resolved in May 2004 when Claimant D
received a settlement from the second place bidder of
$450,000.
¶5. a. Claimant E
b. 2002
c. This case was resolved in 2005. In 1997, the
Ministry of Transportation procured a radar system from
Claimant E under a turnkey contract. The system became
operational in 1998 and, in July 2002, Claimant E
sought to close out the contract based upon a
satisfactory evaluation of the radar, as mandated by
the agreement. The GOP refused to close the contract,
arguing that the system did not function properly and
that Claimant E had not fulfilled its obligations. In
a possible breach of contract, the GOP ordered its bank
to collect from a $6 million performance bond posted by
Claimant E before negotiations to settle this dispute
could begin. That bond drawdown order was stopped by a
temporary injunction granted by a New York court in
August 2002.
Claimant E and the GOP reached agreement in April 2004
on rules for submitting this dispute to local
arbitration in Peru. The parties initiated the
arbitration procedures on June 1, 2004. The
arbitration panel issued its 3-0 decision on June 16,
2005, in favor of the GOP. Claimant E is paid the GOP
$500,000 in damages and the GOP will issue a statement
absolving Claimant E from future obligations. The GOP
returned the bond to Claimant E.
¶6. a. Claimant F
b. 1999
c. In October 1999, the GOP's forestry and parks
authority, INRENA, obtained an emergency decree halting
the movement of logging equipment and lumber in several
of Peru's jungle provinces. INRENA shut down a logging
operation in which Claimant F had invested $2 million
and seized lumber intended for export to Claimant F.
The GOP alleged that the Peruvian company was engaged
in illegal logging. Claimant F denied the charges,
asserting that the GOP's actions were intended to put
Claimant F's partner out of business. Claimant F and
its Peruvian partner have waged a legal battle in Peru
against INRENA since then. Claimant F has not sought
Embassy assistance since 2002.
¶7. a. Claimant G
b. 1970
c. Claimant G signed an agreement with the GOP in
1953 to build roads in rural Peru in exchange for one
million acres of land. Claimant G began developing a
first installment of 60,000 hectares, but a military
government expropriated the land in the 1960s.
Claimant G filed suit. In 1971, the Peruvian Supreme
Court ruled that the GOP had to pay Claimant G for the
roads he had built.
In its September 2002 ATPDEA commitment letter, the GOP
noted that the judiciary had recognized Claimant G's
right to indemnity for the road construction, the value
of which needed to be determined through further
proceedings. The GOP further pledged to "ensure a
transparent and prompt resolution."
In March 2004, the GOP issued a supreme decree
establishing a special commission to negotiate a
settlement with Claimant G. The commission and
Claimant G's attorneys have met three times in Lima,
but the two sides failed to agree on a final
compensation figure before the mandate of the
Commission expired.
Claimant G met again with GOP officials in 2005 to
discuss the methodology for establishing the market
value price for the work done in 1968. The GOP
proposed that Claimant H agree to a new independent
appraisal to determine the base amount of compensation.
Claimant G agreed in principle, but the GOP refused to
compensate Claimant G in one lump sum.
In May 2005, the GOP found an official document from
Claimant G in an archived Ministry of Agriculture file
that claims the total value of the work completed in
1968 was $865,000. According to the GOP, using a
mixture of Treasury bonds and bills, the current-day
value would total approximately $10 million. Claimant
G asserts that the document was not a complete
assessment of work completed.
On March 30, 2006, Claimant G accepted the Peruvian
Government's offer of compensation. The GOP is still
working to budgetary approval from the Peruvian
Congress.
¶8. a. Claimant H
b. 2001
c. Peruvian tax agency SUNAT served Claimant H in
November 2001 with a $49 million tax assessment. SUNAT
claimed that Claimant H's local power company under
previous ownership underpaid taxes from 1996-1999 due
to improper use of depreciation after the privatization
of the power company. Claimant H purchased the
privatized company in 1999. The power company was
privately audited from 1996-1999, and its financial
statements for those years were approved by GOP
representatives on the company's board and by the GOP
privatization agency.
In December 2001, Claimant H filed an administrative
claim against the tax assessment. In September 2002,
SUNAT upheld its assessment but reduced the amount to
$43 million. In late September 2002, Claimant H
appealed this decision to the Tax Court. The pending
assessment against Claimant H now totals more than $50
million with interest. The Tax Court issued in May
2004 a decision disagreeing with the method of
depreciation employed by the company and asking SUNAT
to recalculate its assessment. Parallel to these legal
proceedings, Claimant H and the GOP submitted this case
to international arbitration in 2004. Claimant H
argues that SUNAT's reassessment violates a Legal and
Tax Stability Agreement between Claimant H and the GOP.
This case is pending a decision in international
arbitration.
¶9. a. Claimant I
b. 2003
c. In December 2003, tax agency SUNAT assessed Claimant I
$9 million in fines and reduced its income tax credit for
1998 from 32 million Soles (Peruvian currency) to 9 million
Soles. The assessment was based on SUNAT's claim that
Claimant I's 1997 merger with a local metal refining company
had no economic substance. Claimant I believes the merger
was done correctly and that its receipt of applicable tax
benefits was in strict compliance with existing Peruvian
law. Claimant I contends that the economic substance of the
merger has been clearly demonstrated. In December 2004,
SUNAT, after reviewing Claimant I's 1999-2001 income taxes,
assessed the company with additional fines. As of December
31, 2005, Claimant I's tax liability for the 1998-2001
assessments was estimated to be more than $110 million.
In February 2006, Claimant I hired CONATA, the Peruvian
state-owned appraisal agency, to evaluate 10 percent of
the company's holdings as a test. The results were
lower than Claimant I's own appraisal by 30 percent.
According to Claimant I, the CONATA appraisal valued
the company's assets individually (as one would do in a
liquidation) rather than as part of an integrated
profitable enterprise. Claimant I in May 2006
requested that CONATA conduct an integral assessment.
There is also a growing backlog of VAT refunds due to
Claimant I, dating from mid-2004. In September 2004,
as a result of Claimant I's request for a VAT credit,
SUNAT conducted a full audit of the company's January-
July 2004 tax documents, inquiring why the company did
not pay VAT on some zinc and copper sales. In November
2004, SUNAT assessed that Claimant I owed more than
$2.2 million in back VAT payments and offset this
amount against the refund for VAT credit. SUNAT then
began an audit of Claimant I's VAT documents dating
from 1999-2001. As of December 31, 2005, the company
has an assessed VAT liability of $44 million for the
years 1999-2001. In January 2006, SUNAT began another
tax audit of Doe Run, this time for the 2002-2003
period. This audit is still in process. While the
audits continue, SUNAT refuses to grant Claimant I's
credit on VAT refunds, which total more than $100
million.
¶10. a. Claimant J
b. 2001
c. This case was resolved in September 2005. Claimant
J is a local power company majority-owned by two US
energy companies. Claimant J signed a ten-year legal
and tax stability agreement with the GOP in 1994. Tax
agency SUNAT disputed the company's continued use after
1999 of accelerated depreciation, which was permitted
under Peruvian law for companies that underwent
reorganizations. The issue initially went to
arbitration and a parallel Tax Court proceeding.
Claimant J won in both instances, but SUNAT was
permitted to revisit the case. In July 2003, SUNAT
assessed claimant with $56 million in back taxes due
since 1999. Claimant J again appealed the SUNAT
assessment to the Tax Court, which ruled in February
2004 that Claimant J had a right to revalue assets and
that there should be no assessments for the years 1996-
¶1998. The Tax Court, however, asked SUNAT to review
the 1999 assessment again; SUNAT concluded Claimant J
overvalued its assets to reduce its tax burden.
After another appeal by Claimant J, the Tax Court in
late January 2005 directed GOP agency CONATA (a state-
owned valuation firm) to conduct a new assessment of
Claimant J's 1994 assets. The Tax Court issued a
ruling on July 26 instructing SUNAT to utilize the
CONATA assessment to resolve the dispute. SUNAT
determined that Claimant J owed approximately $282,000
in back taxes and interest through 1999. The company
paid the amount in September 2005. SUNAT also agreed
to not appeal the Tax Court decision that prevented the
agency from reopening the 1996-1997 tax years.
¶11. a. Claimant K
b. 1970
c. Following receipt of a letter from Congressman
Silvestre Reyes (Texas) concerning Claimant K's case in
December 1999, Embassy received a letter from Claimant
K in February 2000 and met with claimant at his request
while he was visiting Peru in May 2000. According to
Claimant K, in about 1970, Peru's military government
expropriated his farm as part of a general land reform
act that expropriated farms over 250 hectares.
Claimant's farm, however, is just under 200 hectares.
Claimant K was issued compensation bonds, which have
since become worthless as the result of hyperinflation.
Claimant K asserts that, because he believed the
expropriation to be illegal and because he was living
in the United States at the time, he made no attempt to
redeem the bonds. Claimant K has provided no estimate
of the land's current value, maintaining that his goal
is to have it returned.
Claimant K began efforts to recover his farm in 1999.
At Embassy's suggestion, he joined an association
composed of others whose land was expropriated.
Claimant K has also contracted legal counsel in Peru,
but has not separately pursued remedies through the
Peruvian courts.
Embassy Officers met with Claimant K in 2000, and were
in contact with Claimant K on one occasion in 2001.
Embassy officers have requested details on the
expropriated property, a timeline of events related to
the expropriation, and any legal analysis supporting
the Claimant's assertion that the expropriation did not
comply with Peruvian law. To date, Embassy has not
received this information. Post has had no contact
with claimant since July 2001.
¶12. a. Claimant L
b. 1976
c. According to Claimant L, pursuant to the Agrarian
Reform Law, the Peruvian Agriculture Ministry (MinAg)
in 1976 transferred about 60 hectares of land he had
purchased in 1964 to the Comunidad Campesina de Oyon
(CCO), located in the district and province of Oyon in
the department of Lima. MinAg allegedly did so without
his knowledge and without notifying him of the action.
Claimant L hired a lawyer to undertake administrative
procedures for recovering his land in 1976, but the
claim was lost, and in May 2000 MinAg found that his
claim had no merit. He appealed administratively and
also received a letter in November 2000 from the Huaura
Superior Court indicating that the GOP's General Office
of Agrarian Reform had mistaken him for another
landholder with a similar name. Simultaneously,
Claimant L filed suit against local mining firm
Buenaventura, which Claimant L asserts took advantage
of the title dispute to cut down all of the trees on
what was wooded land. Claimant L also says that the
dispute led to threats against him from the CCO, and
that terrorist activity in the area prevented him from
returning to his land until 1990.
Claimant L sent Embassy documents in November 2000
related to the alleged expropriation of his land. At
Embassy's request Claimant L provided a brief letter
laying out the facts of the case in March 2001.
Embassy forwarded this letter to MinAg, with a request
that it be given appropriate attention. The Ambassador
received a letter dated May 6, 2002 from MinAg,
confirming that the land had been transferred under the
agrarian reform program to the CCO on June 19, 1976,
and that title had been confirmed to the CCO on
November 8, 1982. MinAg asserts that, as a result,
Claimant L only has a right to claim the fair market
value of the land, and must pursue this through the
courts.
Claimant L has not contacted the Embassy for assistance
since 2002.
¶13. a. Claimant M
b. 2001
c. This case was resolved in January 2006. Claimant M
entered into a consulting services agreement with
PRONAP (now PARSSA) to provide design services for
potable water supply and wastewater system. During the
performance of the contract, Claimant M performed
additional work at the direction of PRONAP but has yet
to receive payment. Claimant initiated arbitration in
June 2001 in order to recover the costs of this
additional service. In March 2004, the arbitration
panel found in favor of Claimant M and ordered PARSSA
to pay approximately $1.5 million. PARSSA disagreed
with the arbitration decision, claiming that the
arbitration panel was neither independent nor
impartial, as PARSSA was not involved in the process of
determining the arbiters. PARSSA appealed to the
Judiciary in April 2004, requesting an annulment of the
arbitration decision.
In August 2005, the Judiciary issued its ruling in
favor of Claimant M, denying a GOP appeal to reject the
binding arbitration. The court ordered PARSSA to pay
the amount owed, which with interest could total
approximately $3 million. On September 2, the Ministry
of Housing appealed the August ruling in favor of
Claimant, claiming there were irregularities in the
handling of the arbitration case. Claimant formally
appealed the submission of the case in October 2005,
citing a mid-July Supreme Court Directive that
instructed the Judiciary to not overturn arbitration
decisions.
After Embassy advocacy on Claimant's behalf, the
company received a $1.9 million partial payment for its
arbitration award on December 23. In early January,
Claimant received a second payment of $600,000.
Claimant M and the GOP continue to negotiate the final
payment of the remaining $141,000 in legal fees.
¶14. a. Claimant N
b. 2004
c. According to the Claimant, SUNAT announced in
October 2004 that it was levying taxes for fuel
supplied to outbound international carriers and would
be collecting these taxes on sales (IVG) for the past
four years (2000-2004). For Claimant N, these back
taxes amounted to $15 million.
The GOP, in an effort to resolve the problem, passed a
new tax law in January 2005 that classified future
sales of fuel for international transport (air and sea)
as exports, exempting the sales from IVG. The law,
however, failed to make the tax exemption retroactive.
The Ministry of Finance, working with Claimant N,
drafted an amendment to the new tax law that would
retroactively grant companies an IVG credit for
previous sales of fuel for international transport.
The Peruvian Congress voted in favor of this law in
October 2005.
While the Congress passed the law, SUNAT claimed that
it was not retroactive and therefore Claimant N could
not claim a credit on its $15 in back taxes. To
rectify the situation, the Ministry of Finance is
drafting a regulation to be passed by Congress to allow
for retroactive credit of the back taxes.
¶15. a. Claimant O
b. 2000
c. Claimant provides telecommunications services over
the world's first integrated global Internet protocol
based network and has deployed a sub-sea fiber optic
network around South America. The submarine fiber and
transmission equipment sit on the ocean floor more than
12 nautical miles from shore, except where a cable
system lands in a country to connect that country to
the worldwide network.
Tax agency SUNAT conducted an assessment of Claimant
O's assets. Per SUNAT's request, Claimant O paid
customs duties and VAT on all goods imported into Peru,
including for equipment extending 12 nautical miles
from Peru's coast. In November 2000, SUNAT re-assessed
Claimant O's property and imposed $43 million in
additional duties and VAT, based on an assessment of
equipment located between 12 and 200 nautical miles
from the coast of Peru. Claimant O has appealed the
reassessment.
Claimant O has not contacted the Embassy for advocacy
since 2005.
Note: In 2003, a Singaporean Company purchased
Claimant O, but Claimant maintains its headquarters in
the United States. Post advocated on behalf of the
company based on US national interest.
¶16. a. Claimant P
b. 1996
c. Claimant P purchased an existing light
manufacturing facility in 1994 and began operations the
same year. Although the company complied with all
district regulations and received all necessary
permits, the city of Lima, the governing municipality,
continues to refuse to finalize the permitting and
registration process for the facility on the grounds
that it is located in an environmentally sensitive
area.
Claimant presented its permits and details of the plant
to the District Government on June 6, 2005. The
district government has one month to make a decision.
Once it makes a decision, it will forward the paperwork
to the Lima Provincial Government for its
consideration.
If the Municipal Government refuses to recognize the
Claimant's permits, the company could be forced to
move, which would cost approximately $3.7 million.
¶17. To our knowledge, none of the following have signed
Privacy Act Waivers. The companies are as follows:
Claimant A - Engelhard
Claimant B - Princeton Dover
Claimant C - Big 3 Marine
Claimant D - STM Wireless
Claimant E - Northrop Grumman Corporation
Claimant F - Newman Lumber
Claimant G - Mr. Roy LeTourneau, U.S. Citizen
Claimant H - Duke Energy
Claimant I - Doe Run
Claimant J - Luz del Sur
Claimant K - Dr. Jaime Muro-Crousillat, U.S. Citizen
Claimant L - Mr. Manuel A. Vizurraga, U.S. Citizen
Claimant M - Parsons
Claimant N - Exxon Mobil
Claimant O - Global Crossings
Claimant P - Kimberly Clark
STRUBLE