Difference between revisions of "Extradition"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
==Extradition versus Abduction== | ==Extradition versus Abduction== | ||
| − | Because the extradition process can sometimes be time consuming, expensive and complicated, some countries have turned to abduction to recover a fugitive from a foreign state. Abduction involves one state entering a foreign state and removing the fugitive in question without previously requesting permission, or following normal extradition procedures. Such abductions are usually in violation of the domestic law of the country in which they occur, and is of questionable legality under international law as well. In United States v. Alvarez-Machain, for instance, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Humberto Alvarez-Machain's forcible abduction did not prohibit his criminal trial from proceeding. The Supreme Court found that nothing in the U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty specifically prohibited abduction, and that the U.S. still had jurisdiction over Alvarez-Machain. The dissent strongly disagreed and claimed that abduction is a gross violation of international law norms. | + | Because the extradition process can sometimes be time consuming, expensive and complicated, some countries have turned to abduction to recover a fugitive from a foreign state. Abduction involves one state entering a foreign state and removing the fugitive in question without previously requesting permission, or following normal extradition procedures. Such abductions are usually in violation of the domestic law of the country in which they occur, and is of questionable legality under international law as well. In United States v. Alvarez-Machain, for instance, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Humberto Alvarez-Machain's forcible abduction did not prohibit his criminal trial from proceeding.<ref>504 U.S. 655 (1992), available at http://supreme.justia.com/us/504/655/case.html</ref> The Supreme Court found that nothing in the U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty specifically prohibited abduction, and that the U.S. still had jurisdiction over Alvarez-Machain. The dissent strongly disagreed and claimed that abduction is a gross violation of international law norms. |
Extradition is also very different from the practice of extraordinary rendition, wherein criminal suspects are sent to other countries for imprisonment and interrogation. Where extradition is meant to return fugitives so that they can stand trial or fulfill a criminal sentence, extraordinary rendition is meant mainly to extract information from suspects, often those suspected of terrorist activities. Many critics of the practice of extraordinary rendition say that it is designed to circumvent due process and torture prohibitions and should not be used. | Extradition is also very different from the practice of extraordinary rendition, wherein criminal suspects are sent to other countries for imprisonment and interrogation. Where extradition is meant to return fugitives so that they can stand trial or fulfill a criminal sentence, extraordinary rendition is meant mainly to extract information from suspects, often those suspected of terrorist activities. Many critics of the practice of extraordinary rendition say that it is designed to circumvent due process and torture prohibitions and should not be used. | ||
