8 See for example. B the 2003 U.S. Department of Defense`s Status of U.S. Military and Civilian Personnel Agreement, present in Afghanistan as part of cooperation efforts to respond to terrorism, humanitarian aid and civilian aid, military training and exercises, etc., 26 Sept.28. May 2003, 2002 U.S.T. LEXIS 100 (entered into force on May 28, 2003), creating oEF personnel in accordance with the 1981 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Exempt Status and Tax Exemption or Control of Imported or Exported Goods from Board control or goods. See also the status agreement negotiated by ISAF shortly after its inception, the Military Technical Agreement between the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and the Interim Administration of Afghanistan (hereafter the interim administration), 4 January 2002, 41 I.M 1032 (2002). Under the MTA, ISAF personnel were granted expert diplomatic immunities for missions set out in the 1946 UN Convention on UN Privileges and Immunities, ISAF was not taxable and enjoyed full freedom to operate virtually without reference to the Afghan authorities, and the ISAF commander had the last power to interpret the MTA`s conditions. In both cases, the contractors were given the same status as the armed forces. NATO SOFA is a multilateral agreement applicable between all NATO member countries. Since June 2007, 26 countries, including the United States, have either ratified the agreement or joined it by joining NATO.126 NATO SOFA127 is the only SOFA to have been concluded under a treaty.128 The most frequently dealt with in a sofa is legal protection against legal proceedings granted to US personnel while present in a foreign country. The agreement defines the contracting party that is able to assert criminal and/or civil jurisdiction. In other words, the agreement defines how national civil and criminal laws apply to U.S.

personnel while serving in a foreign country. The United States has agreements in which it has exclusive jurisdiction, but the common agreement leads to a shared jurisdiction between the United States and the signatory country. Exclusive jurisdiction is where the United States retains the right to exercise all criminal and disciplinary jurisdictions in the event of a violation of the laws of the foreign nation while the person is present in that country. Shared jurisdiction occurs when each party to the agreement retains exclusive jurisdiction for certain criminal offences, but also allows the United States to require the host country to remove jurisdiction in favor of the United States, which exercises criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction. The right to exercise responsibility for U.S. personnel is not limited to the time a person is in a military facility. It can also cover the people of the facility. The right to jurisdiction may give rise to full immunity from the laws of the host country while the person is in that country. Reaffirming the Intention of the Parties that this permanent partnership includes an individual programme of cooperation with security ministries and other national institutions, as well as improving the capabilities and capabilities of the Afghan security forces, including their ability to respond to threats to terrorism, by training and supporting specialized Afghan units and providing appropriate access to NATO`s military and civilian courses, institutions and skills, and the United States is a party to the Inter-American Mutual Assistance Treaty (Rio Treaty), 139, for which the United States.