Abstract
By virtue of state sovereignty, states exercise authority over all persons and things within their territories. This includes individuals suspected of committing or charged with crimes in foreign states. International law generally imposes no obligation to surrender individuals suspected of or charged with committing crimes in foreign states. Fugitives may only be returned when an agreement exists between the states concerned. As such, states are increasingly ratifying international treaties mandating cooperation to ensure that individuals responsible for certain categories of crimes are brought to justice. It is worth noting that some of these states lack extradition treaties with each other. For example, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are party to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) which mandates that they cooperate with each other in ensuring that crimes related to corruption are prosecuted. However, there is no extradition treaty between South Africa and the UAE. In these circumstances, a question arises as to whether they can they rely on the UNCAC to extradite individuals for corruption-related crimes. If they can, what is the nature of the international obligation entrenched under the UNCAC? Overall, what is the standing of international treaty clauses on extradition for states without extradition treaties?
Highlights
South Africa and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are party to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) which mandates that they cooperate with each other in ensuring that crimes related to corruption are prosecuted
What is the nature of the international obligation entrenched under the UNCAC? Overall, what is the standing of international treaty clauses on extradition for states without extradition treaties?
It was suggested that if he has fled to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates [UAE], surrendering him in order to extradite him from Dubai to South Africa to stand trial for corruption would not be possible or feasible – because no bilateral extradition treaty is in force between SA and the UAE
Summary
By virtue of state sovereignty, states exercise authority over all persons and things within their territories. This is attributed largely to globalisation, which fosters interdependence and cooperation between states.[14] Sovereignty is sometimes seen to be undermined where an extradition treaty is in existence when the state to which the request is being made cannot extradite due to the likelihood of death sentence being executed on the wanted person This was seen in the case of Tsebe and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Others, Phale v Minister of Home Affairs and Others[15] where Botswana’s sovereign right to make laws applicable and be able to execute them (sentencing the accused to death) was limited by South Africa’s need to respect its own laws within the territory under its sovereignty (i.e. within the borders of South Africa).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
