Murder in Bahrain: Jurisdiction under the U.S.-Bahrain Status of Forces Agreement

Police sirens pushed through the air in Manama on Friday night. This time the clamor was not to signal the simmering civil unrest that has troubled the country, but something far more ominous.

Murder.

Thao Suranari,* a Thai national, was killed by her U.S. Navy boyfriend in the early morning hours of Saturday, November 28. Neighbors reported an argument; she was thrown off the balcony of their apartment. Strangely, there was a news blackout with respect to the incident. There was nothing in the Bahraini newspapers on Saturday morning. Perhaps we can excuse the local reporters since Saturday's issue had gone to press before the crime took place. But there was nothing in the Bahraini newspapers on Sunday, either.

The U.S. Navy's Public Affairs Office ignored the event. Not even the Internet contained a report. Why the silence?

A Status of Forces Agreement ("SOFA") is a treaty or executive agreement between two countries which provides for the stationing of troops of one country in the territory of another. Some of these agreements are lengthy and involved, such as the SOFA between Panama and the United States executed in 1979. There was a large military presence in the former Canal Zone and various military operations needed to be covered. Other agreements, such as the one between the United States and Bahrain, run to only a few pages.

There is a general but mistaken belief--even one held by some military contractors--that the U.S.-Bahrain SOFA is a classified document. It is not. The SOFA entered into force in 1991 and was published at T.I.A.S. No. 12236. A copy of the SOFA can be found in county law libraries and law school libraries throughout the United States. The SOFA can also be found on the Lexis/Nexis and Westlaw services.

In Bahrain, the document is harder to find. The SOFA is not available on the Internet, either. Here's a link to a copy:Status of Forces.

Article 5 of the U.S.-Bahrain SOFA provides that the United States will have criminal jurisdiction over crimes committed by service members in Bahrain. The language is clear. Those U.S. service members who are accused of crimes will be subject in the first instance to military justice. An accused military member is also subject to general federal criminal jurisdiction. In either case, the criminal justice system should operate in a transparent manner. Secret proceedings deny justice to victims and society as a whole.

Good relations between the countries are not served by secrecy over crimes. For justice to be effective it must be public. If the United States wishes to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over an accused it must do so in a public, transparent manner. Otherwise justice is simply not served and the impression that foreign forces may act without consequences is reinforced.

*The victim's name has been changed. The photograph of the crime scene was posted by persons unknown on social media. An accused is entitled to the presumption of innocence under the United States Constitution. The author, as far as he knows, is the only civilian attorney in Saudi Arabia or Bahrain who has tried a capital murder case in the United States and who has experience in the implementation of Status of Forces Agreements. The views contained herein are those of the author and no other person.