Introduction:
This brief provides a comprehensive analysis of Ordinance S-50010[1] recently passed by the City of Phoenix, authorizing the transfer of 500-600 unclaimed firearms to the National Police of Ukraine[2]. The brief examines the potential conflicts between this ordinance and the relevant provisions of the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 12-945[3], as well as the federal law 22 U.S. Code § 2778[4], which controls arms exports and imports. It highlights how the transfer of firearms to a foreign law enforcement agency may violate both state and federal regulations.
Background:
Ordinance S-50010 permits the City of Phoenix to transfer
unclaimed firearms to the National Police of Ukraine. However, this transfer
raises concerns regarding its compliance with ARS 12-945 and 22 U.S. Code §
2778, which govern the sale, disposal, and control of firearms in the state and
at the federal level, respectively.
Analysis:
1. ARS 12-945:
ARS 12-945 outlines the procedures for handling unclaimed
property, including firearms, by law enforcement agencies in Arizona. It
mandates the sale of unclaimed firearms to authorized businesses unless
prohibited by federal or state law. The proceeds from such sales are deposited
into the general fund of the jurisdiction.
2. 22 U.S. Code § 2778:
22 U.S. Code § 2778 establishes regulations and controls for
the export and import of arms, including firearms. It ensures that these
activities align with the interests of national security and foreign policy.
The transfer of firearms to a foreign law enforcement agency must comply with
these federal provisions.
3. Conflict with ARS 12-945 and 22 U.S. Code § 2778:
The transfer of unclaimed firearms to the National Police of Ukraine under Ordinance S-50010 may raise concerns regarding its compliance with both ARS 12-945 and 22 U.S. Code § 2778. By bypassing the sale requirement specified in ARS 12-945 and gifting the firearms to a foreign governmental entity, the City of Phoenix may be in violation of state law. Additionally, the transfer may trigger potential violations of federal regulations governing arms exports and imports, as outlined in 22 U.S. Code § 2778.
4. Legal Implications and Precedents:
Gifting firearms to foreign governmental entities,
particularly when it involves a foreign law enforcement agency, has significant
legal implications.[5] It
may not only violate the established state and federal laws but also set an
unfavorable precedent. Previous cases have demonstrated that cities across the
United States have adhered to the prescribed procedures when handling unclaimed
firearms, ensuring compliance with state and federal regulations. Deviating
from these established procedures may invite legal challenges and undermine the
principles of accountability and transparency.
On the federal level, the United States Department of State[6],
which oversees the implementation of 22 U.S. Code § 2778, has strict
regulations governing arms exports and imports. These regulations prioritize
national security, foreign policy considerations, and compliance with
international agreements. Any transfer of firearms to foreign entities must
adhere to these regulations, ensuring transparency and accountability.
Conclusion:
In light of the information presented above, the transfer of
unclaimed firearms to the National Police of Ukraine under Ordinance S-50010
may conflict with both ARS 12-945 and 22 U.S. Code § 2778. The City of Phoenix
should reconsider this transfer, as it potentially violates state law regarding
the sale and disposal of unclaimed firearms, while also potentially
contravening federal regulations governing arms exports and imports. It is
recommended that the City of Phoenix explores alternative avenues that align
with the existing legal framework to ensure compliance with both state and
federal statutes.
The transfer of unclaimed firearms to the National Police of
Ukraine under Ordinance S-50010 raises significant concerns regarding its
compliance with both ARS 12-945 and 22 U.S. Code § 2778. Gifting firearms to a
foreign governmental entity, even if it is a foreign law enforcement agency,
has legal implications and may violate state and federal laws governing the
sale, disposal, and control of firearms. The City of Phoenix should carefully
reconsider this transfer, taking into account the potential legal challenges
and the need to adhere to established procedures and regulations. Exploring
alternative avenues that align with the existing legal framework is crucial to
ensure compliance with both state and federal statutes while upholding
transparency and accountability in firearm management.
[1] https://www.phoenix.gov/cityclerksite/City%20Council%20Meeting%20Files/6-28-23%20Formal%20Agenda%20-%20FINAL.pdf
[2] National Police of
Ukraine: https://mvs.gov.ua/en
[3] Arizona Revised Statutes,
Title 12, Chapter 6 - Unclaimed Property:
https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00945.htm
[4] 22 U.S. Code § 2778 -
Control of arms exports and imports:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2778
[5] United Nations, The
Illicit Market in Firearms, (2019) https://www.unodc.org/documents/e4j/Module_04_-_The_Illicit_Market_in_Firearms_FINAL.pdf
[6] United States Department
of State - Directorate of Defense Trade Controls:
https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/ddtc_public/
