Which entity has jurisdiction over offenses committed by U.S. military personnel under SOFA?

The correct choice indicates that the United States has jurisdiction over offenses committed by U.S. military personnel under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Japan, unless that jurisdiction is waived in favor of Japan. This arrangement reflects the balance of legal authority established in the SOFA, where U.S. service members are primarily subject to U.S. military law for offenses committed while they are serving in Japan.

In practice, this means that U.S. military personnel are generally tried in military courts under U.S. law, which is essential to maintaining effective military command and discipline. However, there are provisions in the SOFA that allow for jurisdiction to be handed over to Japanese authorities if the U.S. chooses to waive its rights. This waiver typically occurs in cases that are serious or of significant public interest in Japan, emphasizing cooperation and mutual legal respect between the two nations.

The other choices do not align with the established jurisdictional framework outlined in the SOFA. For example, a joint U.S.-Japan military tribunal or United Nations involvement is not part of the SOFA's jurisdictional provisions. Understanding this balance is crucial for recognizing how military law interacts with host nation laws within international agreements.