Extradition Law Research Articles

The Role for Human Rights Obligations in Canadian Extradition Law

SummaryTo secure greater inter-state cooperation in criminal law enforcement, Canada has entered into a number of extradition treaties. Yet alongside this network of extradition treaties lies a network of human rights treaties to which Canada has also agreed to be bound. Given the inherently international nature of extradition, and the interconnection between Canada's human rights treaties and its obligations under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, one would have thought that Canada's international human rights obligations might play some role in bolstering the protection afforded by the Charter to the rights of an individual facing extradition from Canada, even if the threshold for invoking the latter remains high. And yet, while a review of Canada's extradition jurisprudence for the past thirty years confirms that a role for human rights has emerged in Canadian extradition law, scant attention has been paid to Canada's international human rights treaty obligations as treaty obligations when deciding whether to extradite upon receiving a valid request. The author argues that if Canada's international human rights obligations were considered, along with Canada's domestic Charter obligations, greater guidance would be made available as to the appropriate balance of rights and obligations at stake, while also affording equal treatment to all of the treaty obligations relevant to extradition.

International Terrorism: The Changing Face of International Extradition and European Criminal Law

From 1996 onwards the international legal community has been trying to establish a general anti-terrorism treaty. Despite several attempts to reach agreement on such a general treaty within the framework of an ad hoc commission of the General Assembly of the UN, this goal has never been fulfilled, due to a lack of consensus on the definition of the concept of terrorism. For the very same reason, the offence of terrorism has not been incorporated in the ICC Statute. This raises the question of the extent to which international criminal law is sufficiently equipped to combat international terrorism, particularly considering the effects of the September 11 attacks on national and international criminal law, as well as the fact that an International Extradition Convention with respect to International Terrorism is still lacking. The additional need for such a uniform treaty recently became apparent following the terrorist attacks in Bali and Mombasa (Kenya). At the same time, the EU, with the advent of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), is entering a new era with regard to combating terrorism. The purpose of this development is in principle to abolish the present extradition formalities and obstacles. However, the recent decision of 10 December 2002, issued by the Extradition Chamber of the District Court in Amsterdam, which rejected an extradition request concerning a person suspected of being a member of the Turkish PKK, an organization prohibited in Turkey, also emphasizes the importance of the ‘Rule of Law’ in the area of suppressing terrorism on both the global and European level.

China's Extradition Law of 2000

China's Extradition Law of 2000

Human rights and extradition law in Australia

(2000). Human rights and extradition law in Australia. Australian Journal of Human Rights: Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 101-127.

Extradition Law and the International Criminal Court

Extradition Law and the International Criminal Court

The Pinochet Cases and South African Extradition Law

ABSTRACTIn two momentous decisions in the Pinochet case, the House of Lords has ruled that immunity does not extend to a former head of state for international crimes committed while in office. This article examines these decisions in detail and considers their normative value for South African international human rights lawyers. In particular, the article considers the relevance of the Pinochet case for South African extradition law. The conclusion reached is that the Pinochet decisions provide strong precedent for South African courts. By grasping the intricacies of these decisions, South African lawyers will be in a position to join other international lawyers in creating an effective and co-operative extradition process that makes the world a smaller place for heads of state who commit human rights abuses.

The Arrest of Abdullah Öcalan

Abdullah Öcalan's arrival in Turkey in February 1999 followed a prolonged search in Europe for asylum following his expulsion from Syria in late 1998. His coming within Turkish jurisdiction raises questions about the international processes to bring alleged transnational fugitive offenders before the courts. This article looks at the extradition regime within Europe and the alternative methods of rendition that were eventually employed to remove him from Kenya. Extradition law developed during the nineteenth century and is based on ideas of revolution, the principle of nationality and liberal democracy which pervaded that period. The late twentieth century has a different ethos that offers fewer protection to the political revolutionary, but has incorporated international human rights standards. Extradition law straddles the enforcement of criminal law, non-interference in the domestic affairs of another State and international human rights law. The article concludes by examining the demands of international human rights law for the trial in Turkey.

“Forward this cargo to Taiwan”: Canadian extradition law and practice relating to crime on the high seas

“Forward this cargo to Taiwan”: Canadian extradition law and practice relating to crime on the high seas

The Political Offence Exception in Extradition Law: An Antidote to Prefixed Ideas about Political Integration in Europe?

The Political Offence Exception in Extradition Law: An Antidote to Prefixed Ideas about Political Integration in Europe?

Ryan

616Extradition — Political offences — Definition — Participation in providing logistical support for terrorist crimes — Whether constituting a political offence — Belgian Extradition Laws of 1874 and 1985 — European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, 1977, Article 1 — Reservation by Belgium to Convention — Whether extradition of accused would lead to prosecution in requesting State for his political opinionsExtradition — Jurisdiction of requesting State — Place of commission of offence — Alleged participation outside requesting State in bomb-making in preparation for terrorist offences committed within requesting State — Whether constituting offence in requesting StateExtradition — Procedure — Role of judge examining extradition request — Whether empowered to examine legal procedure in requesting State — The law of Belgium

Book Review: Aspects of Extradition Law

Book Review: Aspects of Extradition Law

The “Penological Exception” to Extradition: On Ultimate Penalties, Human Rights and International Relations

One of the most significant recent developments in the law of extradition is the serious consideration that courts are willing to display to the punitive consequences of an extradition order, if capital punishment is the specific penalty that the requested person is liable to have imposed on him if convicted. At the same time, this development serves also as one of the most dramatic examples of the manner in which the subject of human rights has become a factor in international relations, which nation-states can disregard only by exposing themselves to negative assessments linked to reluctance to respond to formal requests. For the most part the “linkage” has been focused mainly on economic aid, where donor countries would approve requested aid contingent on positive accounting in human rights, but now, as a result of a number of novel judicial decisions, it seems that similar factors will be examined, when requests for extradition are submitted. At the moment, the focus is on the use of the death penalty, but the very reasoning process used may well open up further possibilities.

The Double Criminality Rule Revisited

Extradition law and process is the complex vehicle for the return by one state of accused or convicted fugitives from the criminal justice of another state. From an international law perspective, it is for the most part, a treaty matter bearing on the rights and duties of states and the emphasis is on inter-state cooperation, reciprocity and mutuality of obligations. However, it is also part of the domestic criminal law process and as the result will be the potential or actual deprivation of the liberty or even the life of the fugitive, if the requesting state retains the death penalty, today extradition is seen as necessarily protecting the human rights of the fugitive.The focus of this article is on the protection given to the fugitive by the double or dual criminahty rule under the extradition law of Canada. Two major issues will be analyzed. Firstly, whether the crime for which the extradition request is made by the foreign state is an extraditable crime meeting the requirement of double criminality and secondly, whether the extradition judge in Canada is mandated to inquire into and seek evidence of the foreign criminal law.

Double Criminality in Extradition Law

1. The principle of double criminality is traditionally bound with institutions of international criminal law. Double criminality is a requirement not only with extradition, but also with the transfer of criminal proceedings and with execution of foreign sentences. International criminal law employs a range of “double conditions”, the common denominator of which is the requirement that two legal systems share a certain set of values or legal prescriptions. In addition to double criminality, international law uses such terms as “double punishability”, the “double possibility of criminal proceedings” and the “double possibility of the execution of penal judgment”. Among these concepts, double criminality is the most important and universal condition applied in the basic institutions of international criminal law, such as extradition, the transfer of proceedings, and the execution of foreign penal judgments.

Aspects of Extradition Law. By G. Gilbert Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1991. xiii + 282 pp. Dfl. 195; $112.50; 65.50

Journal Article Aspects of Extradition Law . By G. Gilbert Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1991. xiii + 282 pp. Dfl. 195; $112.50; £65.50 Get access Robin M. White Robin M. White Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar British Yearbook of International Law, Volume 63, Issue 1, 1992, Pages 477–478, https://doi.org/10.1093/bybil/63.1.477 Published: 01 November 1993

Aspects of Extradition Law.

Preface. Case List. 1. Extradition in Context. 2. Mechanisms for International Extradition. 3. Procedural Aspects of Extradition. 4. Extradition and Human Rights. 5. Restrictions on Return. 6. The Political Offence Exemption. 7. Alternative Forms of Rendition. 8. War Criminals. 9. Refuge and Return. Appendix. Bibliography. Index.

Extradition law

Extradition law

The law and practice of extradition: Recent developments

The law and practice of extradition: Recent developments

Continuity or Change in Interstate Extradition? Assessing Puerto Rico v. Branstad

Interstate extradition law would appear radically altered by the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Puerto Rico v. Branstad, overturning a precedent established in Kentucky v. Dennison 126 years earlier that extradition could not be legally compelled by the federal government. Dennison, however, is more complex than is commonly believed, and the demise of one of Dennison's conclusions does not signal a major overhaul of the Supreme Court's treatment of extradition. Rather, the Court's decisions have adhered closely to the original intent of the Constitution's extradition clause. The part of Dennison overturned was therefore noteworthy as an exception to the general thrust of the Court's treatment of extradition. How then did Dennison's bar of legally compelled extradition survive so long when the theory of federalism supporting the decision had been repudiated long before it was reversed? This article explores this question and directs attention to the consequences of Branstad for extradition. Despite the apparent clarity of Branstad, a survey of state extradition officers reveals lingering confusion over extradition law.

The Political Offender Exception in International Extradition Law: Terrorism Versus Human Rights

Abstract The political offense exception in the law of international extradition is one of the issues over which the justifiability of terrorist violence is being debated. The evolution of the political offender exception is sketched and the provisions of the 1986 Supplementary Treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom, which effectively eliminated the political offender exception for violent offenders, are outlined. The debate over the merits of the Treaty then is summarized. A concluding analysis suggests that limited violence is justified in defense of democracy and fundamental human rights and that the political offender exception should be interpreted so as to promote these values.