Extradition

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF CHITTAGONG
 What is extradition?
 Ex = “outing” and traditio = “handing over”

 One country asks another country to return

someone who has been accused of a crime.

 Not to be confused with deportation, which is

administered by the immigration department.
Extradition” is the delivery
of an accused or a convicted
individual to the state on
whose territory he is
alleged to have committed,
to have been convicted of a
crime.
 Rationale behind extradition

According to Starke:
a) No offence should go unpunished
b) place of occurrence is the best place for trial
 Extradition treaty

 There is no international law which can bind a state

to extradite a person to another state. But if it
extradite the other country will receive. An
extradition treaty between two countries
should be in existence before extradition.
 If there is no extradition treaty the country is not
bound to extradite a person.
But if any country wants to extradite a person
without an extradition treaty no law can refrain it.
Case: Factor vs Laubenheimer(1933)
The Montevideo Conference on Extradition 1933
 Extradition Conditions

1. Extraditable offence: Article 1

a) That the demanding State have the jurisdiction to try
and to punish the delinquency which is attributed to
the individual whom it desires to extradite.
b) That the act for which extradition is sought
constitutes a crime and is punishable under the laws
of the demanding and surrendering States with a
minimum penalty of imprisonment for one year.
Principle of double criminality:
Case: Re arton (1896)
Extraditable person:
Article 2:
When the person whose extradition is sought is a citizen of
the country to which the requisition is addressed, his
delivery may or may not be made, as the legislation or
circumstances of the case may, in the judgment of the
surrendering State, determine. If the accused is not
surrendered, the latter State is obliged to bring action
against him for the crime with which he is accused, if such
crime meets the conditions established in sub-article (b) of
the article 1. The sentence pronounced shall be
communicated to the demanding State.
Doctrine of Speciality:

Case: U.S Vs Raucher

The Govt. of Greece Vs. Governor of Brixton
Prison
Prima facie case:
There must be reasonable prima facie evidence
of the guilt of the accused
 Bar to Extradition(Article 5)

Extradition will not be granted:

a) When the penal action or sentence has expired according to the
laws of the demanding State before arresting the accused person, .
b) When the accused has served his sentence in the country
where the crime was committed.
c) When the accused has been or is being tried by the State to
which the requisition was directed for the act with which he is charged.
d) When the accused must appear before any extraordinary
tribunal or court of the demanding State.
e) When the offense is of a political nature or of a character related
thereto.
f) When the offense is purely military or directed against religion.
 Political Offence

Political Offence:
political offence can be broadly defined as an offence
against the security of the state
Pure political offences include crimes such as
treason, spying, and sedition.
Factors to be considered in determining political
crime:
i) the offender's past participation and
involvement with the political movement.
ii) the existence of a connection or link between
the crime and the political objective.
iii)political element must dominate the intent of
the offender to commit the crime, and outweigh the
apparent significance of the common crime.
Case: Re castioni Case( Switzerland Vs. U.K,1891)
The Castioni case set up the two-part test which was
destined to remain the British rule for sixty-four
years: (1) there must be a political disturbance, and
(2) the political offense must be incidental to or form
a part of that disturbance .
Case 2: Re Meunier Case(France Vs Uk,Q.B.D.1894)
the first judicial rejection of anarchism or terrorism as
a legitimate international political method of protest.
: [I]n order to constitute an offence of a political
character, there must be two or more parties in the
State, each seeking to impose the Government of
their own choice on the other, and . . . if the offence
is committed by one side or the other in pursuance of
that object, it is a political offence. ....
Case: Ex Parte Kolczynski (Poland Vs UK-1955)
The English court recognized that a political
offense must be examined according to the
particular political circumstances existing at the
time. He felt that the type of trial the political
offenders would receive subsequent to their return
would be meaningless because they would
ultimately be punished for their political crime.