|
H.R. 2702
In an effort to impose economic sanctions upon Brazil
in an effort to induce Brazil to comply with the Hague Convention, to
which Brazil became a signatory on 12/01/2003, Senator Christopher Smith
of New Jersey introduced H.R. 2702. The goal is to suspend Brazil's
status as a favored nation under the Trade Act of 1974. [In other words,
if enacted into law, the bill would suspend the application of
'Generalized System of Preferences’ (duty-free treatment provided to
eligible articles from beneficiary developing countries) under title V
of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2461 et seq.)
Please contact all of your state's
Representatives in the House and ask them to cosponsor HR 2702. Use this
simple drop down form to select your state, page will open on
Contacting the Congress, displaying all the information you
need. A flat ASCII text file version listing all US Senators and 435
House members is
HERE at Contacting the Congress. Michiganders can access all contact
information
HERE.
To suspend the
application of Generalized System of Preferences for Brazil
111th Congress
1st Session
H.R. 2702
IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
June 4, 2009
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey introduced the following
bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To suspend the application of Generalized System of
Preferences for Brazil until such time as Brazil complies with its
obligations toward the United States under the Convention on the Civil
Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Suspend Brazil GSP Act’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings- Congress finds the following:
(1) According to the Department of State, there
are at least 50 cases involving at least 64 children who were
habitual residents of the United States and who were removed to
Brazil by one parent, wrongfully denying custody to the parent in
the United States, and who have not been returned to the United
States as required under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of
International Child Abduction, done at the Hague on October 25, 1980
(TIAS 11670; in this section referred to as the ‘Hague Convention’).
(2) David Goldman, a United States citizen and
resident of New Jersey, has been trying unsuccessfully since June
2004 to secure the return of his son Sean to the United States where
Sean maintained his habitual residence until his mother, Bruna
Bianchi Ribeiro Goldman, removed Sean to Brazil.
(3) On September 3, 2004, Mr. Goldman filed an
application for the immediate return of Sean to the United States
under the Hague Convention to which both the United States and
Brazil are party and which entered into force between Brazil and the
United States on December 1, 2003.
(4) Pursuant to Article 12 of the Hague
Convention, the judicial authority of Brazil was required to order
Sean’s return to the United States ‘forthwith’, customarily defined
under international law as within six weeks after an application for
return has been filed.
(5) On October 13, 2005, the Brazilian court
refused to return Sean in contravention of Brazil’s obligations
under the Hague Convention even though it found that Sean was a
habitual resident of the United States and, pursuant to
international law, had been wrongfully removed and retained in
Brazil.
(6) On August 22, 2008, Mrs. Goldman passed away
in Brazil leaving Sean without a mother and separated from his
biological father in the United States. Instead of returning Sean to
the custody of his father David, Mrs. Goldman’s second husband,
Joa.AE6o Paulo Lins e Silva, petitioned the Brazilian courts for
custody rights over Sean.
(7) On September 25, 2008, Mr. Goldman filed an
amended application under the Hague Convention against Mr. Lins e
Silva for the return of custody over Sean.
(8) On June 1, 2009, a federal court judge in
Brazil ordered that Sean be turned over to the United States
consulate in Rio de Janeiro and returned to his father on June 3,
2009. The court further ordered that, following a 30-day adaptation
period in the United States, Mr. Goldman be given full custody over
Sean.
(9) On June 2, 2009, one Brazilian Supreme Court
justice suspended the order of the first level of the Federal Court
on the basis of a motion filed by the Progressive Party, a small
Brazilian political party, that objects to the application of the
Hague Convention in Brazil. This suspension must now be heard by the
full Supreme Court, could further delay the Goldman case for months,
and could prevent the return of any other abducted children to the
United States.
(10) Brazil is a primary beneficiary under the
Generalized System of Preferences program. In 2008, Brazil received
duty-free status under the GSP for United States imports totaling
$2.75 billion.
(11) A country that refuses to abide by its
international obligations pursuant to the Hague Convention and
recognize the international rights of parents and their children
from the United States should not be able to export goods to the
United States duty-free under the Generalized System of Preferences
program.
(b) Declaration of Purpose- The purpose of this Act is to--
(1) attain the immediate return of Sean Goldman
and all children to the United States who are being held wrongfully
in Brazil in contravention of the Hague Convention; and
(2) impress upon the judiciary, central authority, and law
enforcement of Brazil the importance of abiding by their respective
obligations pursuant to the Hague Convention.
SEC. 3. SUSPENSION OF APPLICATION OF GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF
PREFERENCES FOR BRAZIL.
(a) Notification of Suspension of Duty-Free Treatment- Not later than 7
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall
notify the member countries of the World Trade Organization that the
United States is suspending the application of Generalized System of
Preferences for Brazil in accordance with the requirements of this
section.
(b) Suspension of Duty-Free Treatment-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall suspend the
application of Generalized System of Preferences for Brazil.
(2) WAIVER- The President may waive the
application of paragraph (1) if the President determines and reports
to the appropriate congressional committees that it is important to
the national interests of the United States to do so.
(c) Reinstatement of Duty-Free Treatment- The President may reinstate
the application of Generalized System of Preferences for Brazil if the
President certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the
following requirements have been satisfied:
(1) The central authority of Brazil is complying
with its obligations under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of
International Child Abduction, done at the Hague on October 25, 1980
(TIAS 11670; in this section referred to as the ‘Hague Convention’)
with respect to international child abduction cases involving
children from the United States.
(2) The judicial system of Brazil is complying
with its obligations under the Hague Convention with respect to
international child abduction cases involving children from the
United States.
(3) The law enforcement system of Brazil is
complying with its obligations under the Hague Convention with
respect to international child abductions cases involving children
from the United States.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In
this section:
(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term ‘appropriate
congressional committees’ means--
(A) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the
Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Finance
of the Senate.
(2) GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES- The term ‘Generalized System
of Preferences’ means duty-free treatment provided to eligible
articles from beneficiary developing countries under title V of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2461 et seq.).
END
Full text on
THOMAS Register
|
