Jun

24

Sometimes “No Comment” Is the Best Comment


Posted by at 8:29 pm on June 24, 2008
Category: General

Iranian F-14 Sleeve PatchA Florida man and a California man who ran separate aviation parts businesses have been arrested and charged, in a criminal complaint unsealed yesterday, with violations of the Arms Export Control Act and the U.S. embargo on Iran in connection with alleged exports to Iran of spare parts for F-14s and other military aircraft. According to the criminal complaint (not yet available on Pacer but as described by the Miami Herald), orders for the parts were received by email and then shipped to Dubai — that’s a huge surprise!! — for re-export to Iran.

One of the defendants is represented by Robert Abreu, a Miami criminal defense attorney who appears to have made the mistake of speaking to the New York Times before actually reading the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that govern the case:

Robert Abreu, a lawyer for [one of the defendants], said in an interview that based on his initial reading of the case: “It does not deal apparently with any weapons or munitions. As far as I know, it was simply dual-use aircraft parts, and I think this is being trumped up to an arms violation where it’s not.”

Perhaps Mr. Abreu was misquoted, but this seems to suggest that he thinks that aircraft parts can’t be the predicate of an Arms Export Control Act prosecution because they aren’t “weapons or munitions.” Aircraft parts “specifically designed or modified for” military aircraft fall under Category VIII(h) of the United States Munitions List, and their exports are controlled by the Arms Export Control Act. One of the parts mentioned in the criminal complaint was an F-14 harness, and this is clearly a part specifically designed for the F-14 and not usable in any other craft.

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2008 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


3 Comments:


Hi Clif: I think there’s a typo in the above. The category should be VIII(h).

Comment by LDM on June 24th, 2008 @ 8:37 pm

Thanks, LDM. Right link but wrong roman numeral. 🙁
Fixed now.

Comment by Clif Burns on June 24th, 2008 @ 9:55 pm

Mr. Abreau’s comment is a perfect example of why the Florida Bar ought to relax its protectionist rules against out-of-state practitioners. Arms smuggling just isn’t the same as drug smuggling (there is actually a legitimate market for arms), nor is defending arms smugglers the same as defending drug smugglers.

Comment by Mike Deal on June 25th, 2008 @ 9:59 am