International Cooperation in Extraditing Criminals - Essay Example

Introduction

When criminals commit an offense, Law is expected to take its course. Criminals who break the law must be charged and prosecuted if found guilty. However, criminals have gone a notch higher whereby they flee their own country and hide in another to avoid custody. As such, nowadays crime has gone beyond the boundaries of a single state. Previously, crime was confined to the territorial jurisdictions of a country due to the limitations that existed. Presently, with the advent of new information technology, the twenty-first century is ablaze with rampant criminal activities that have gone to the extent of inviting the international community to give a hand in the combat of crime. High overrated crime has led states to seek the assistance of each other through cooperation to ensure those who do not bind by the law are convicted and charged. That being the case, criminals no longer have a place to hide. Such issues introduce us to extradition and how states cooperate internationally to deal with it. Finalizing of extradition can only happen if, international cooperation takes the upper hand. With the above laying out the foundation of the essay, part one of the piece will look into the meaning of the international cooperation in extradition criminals. Part two will focus on the legal basis for extradition, Part three will focus on the conditions for extradition, and part four of the essay is going to give attention to the manifestations of international criminal cooperation. Lastly will be the conclusion.

Part 1: Meaning of international cooperation in extradition

Contemporary society in the digital age tied up with technological advancements has become a playground for criminal activities. Criminals have assumed organized force. Illegal activities have assumed broader scopes and striking with higher intensity than ever before. Consequently, many countries are finding difficulty in coping politically, economically and socially. Ease in transportation and communication networks is continually helping criminals to flee from the jurisdictional clutches of victim states quickly. While organized crimes and other serious crimes threaten the national and international prosperity of the globe, international cooperation through extradition procedures can be an efficient solution to threats of violation. Therefore, extradition has gained enhanced recognition as a primary avenue available for states to combat crime (Bassiouni, 2014).

Extradition is the means through which lawbreakers can face the full force of the law whether in their country or another country. It is a type of judicial assistance that happens between states. According to Oppenheim, extradition is the delivery of an accused or convicted individual to the nation on whose territory he is purported to have committed misconduct punishable by the laws of that country. Criminals who may think of either hiding in another territory or even escalate crime in a different country of which he is not a citizen may not enjoy the fruits of their crime. Once the other government takes note of such a criminal, the criminal is turned over to his home country for prosecution. In that sense, the key to extraditing criminals is maintaining good international relations between states. With that in mind, every government body should dedicate themselves by all means to combat crime. Extradition is an essential legal framework whose importance is growing day by day. From merely being a state practice it has emerged as a concept. (Cryer, 2010).

Effective extradition requires states to have better relations with each other. Hindrances to international cooperation can prove extradition a futile adventure. States must be in good terms with each other through diplomatic envoys and missions to have an added advantage in carrying out extradition. In the constitution of most countries in the world, every nation must adhere to the policy of international cooperation. The efficacy of collaboration comes in handy in combating corruption and fighting of common enemies just but mentions a few (Arnell, 2017). However, as much as states may collaborate to extradite criminals, it goes without objection that countries have to sign treaties to ensure that a country has got the right to go ahead and deport a criminal. Where no settlement is contracted, a government lacks the legal power to extradite a lawbreaker.

The legal process of extradition helps in the suppression of crime. It has a deterring effect since criminals cannot escape punishment by fleeing to another territory. Countries that get involved in the extradition process create a stronger bond when they get involved in the extradition process. The process is fundamental to efforts of a state in safeguarding its territorial state interests. A nation that would adopt a policy of non-extradition where criminals can flee to the state and gain refuge would become a place of international crimes. In that case, the same criminals would turn dangerous and later dismantle the interests of their host. Extradition facilitates reciprocity as a state can mutually agree again in future to perform the equal extradition. A state currently requested to extradite the criminal may have the similar need in the future, and if they had agreed before, the other state would be obliged to accept. Extradition promotes the spirit of goodwill thus maintaining healthy international relationships between countries (Bassiouni, 2014).

Part 2: Legal bases of extradition

The legal basis for extradition may be a treaty, an ad hoc agreement or the principles of reciprocity or postulates that are supported by internal legislation of a country. Through treaties, extradition is ordinarily granted from bilateral and multilateral treaties. Such treaties may be specifically designed to deal with extradition or contain specific provisions on the issue. Bilateral treaties are made between two countries while multilateral treaties are made amongst a large number of states. In fact, the presence of multinational treaties averts the need of having hundreds of bilateral treaties (Sadoff, 2016).

Extradition is a mixed concept; to an extent, legal and also political. Judicial institutions usually initiate it, and the latter is later delivered through the government political channel. The constitution of a state is the legal document that determines the extent to which a government can agree to extradite a criminal. However, some jurisdictions have got time-honored legal traditions that decline to extradite their citizen. Extradition requests of a legal basis also rely on agreements. The agreements can either be international, regional, or bilateral treaties or a specific agreement between the two authorities to extradite a particular subject. However, international law does not provide obligation of a country to surrender a wanted criminal to the other state. As such, treaties are the force behind successful extradition. In light of fighting crimes through cooperation countries find no other alternative other than to cooperate through building up of international conventions. However, some countries are reluctant in signing extradition treaties. Behind their decline, lie different laws that are only specific to the state. For example, in South Africa any person accused or found guilty of an extraditable offense committed in the territory of a foreign State not a party to an extradition agreement may be surrendered to that state with the approval in writing of the President. Where such cases happen, a requesting state seeks international courtesy. Through international courtesy, the country requesting extradition promises to extend the same treatment to the receiving country. For instance, in 2011 a British national was extradited from Thailand to the UAE to face criminal charges of embezzlement of funds from a company owned by the government. The British national was returned over to the UAE authorities after the Thai Criminal Court agreed to extradite him to the UAE, although no formal treaty between the UAE and Thailand exist (Sadoff, 2016).

An extradition request once agreed through a treaty or international courtesy, enforcement takes it course, and the subject that has committed a crime is expected to be arrested enforcement takes different forms such as arrest, interviewing of the suspect or deportation. Through arrest, a fugitive can be retrieved by the Interpol. The work of the Interpol is to cooperate with other countries and alerting them about the suspect. By doing so, they limit the suspect`s ability to travel from one destination to the other. Other than arrest, a prosecutor can interview the wanted subject to get into the depth of the crime. Also, the prosecutor can order an immediate deportation of the subject especially if the criminal has been suspected for having gotten involved in drug trafficking, money laundering or even human trafficking (Malekian, 2014).

As much as enforcement helps in the capture of a fugitive, there are defenses to extradition. A criminal being suspected can opt to defend himself and obtain freedom from extradition. Available defenses include the defenses of dual criminality, political crimes, human rights concerns, conflicts of jurisdictions but also diplomatic protection. With dual criminality, an individual will only be apprehended if his or her actions constitute an offense punishable in both, the requesting and the requested states. When a crime in one country is not considered a crime by the other country, the offender will find protection from the country that does not recognize what he or she did an offense. For instance, a country in the Middle East may have a hard time to extradite a woman in U.S.A for disobeying Sharia law. Also, political crime is not deported. A person who frees his or her country due to the peaceful opposition and criticizing the current regime can find favor of an extradition offense from the host country. Furthermore, the presence of discrepancies in the views of the two countries entering into an extradition agreement is a defense to extradition. If the extraditing state disagrees with the punishment to be given to the person, they are sending back; this would frustrate the extradition request even if a treaty exists between the two countries. Diplomatic protection is another way in which a criminal can find a defensive mechanism against arrest. There are complications to the extradition of an individual who holds dual nationality as the individual owes allegiance to two jurisprudences (Arnell, 2017).

Part 3: Basic conditions for extradition

In this essay, three terms for extradition will be discussed under three main areas which include the commission of an offense, Jurisdictional and legal basis of requesting state to request for extradition and decision of the requested state to extradite or not to extradite. For a crime to be extraditable, it has to meet the threshold of an extraditable offense. In general, the offense for which extradition is requested must be enumerated among the list of extraditable crimes or established according to the laws of a territorial state. In the absence of a treaty, the extradition may be based on the principle of reciprocity, and the offenses must be mutually recognized as extraditable. Bilateral extradition treaties and national extradition laws in the past usually contained lists of crimes considered to be extraditable offenses. These regularly included crimes such as murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, arson, bribery or fraud. However, as the fixed definition of crimes may vary from one state to another, the practice of enumerating extraditable acts in lists has often led to complications in extradition agreements. Moreover, many of the older extradition treaties have become outdated, as their records of extraditable offenses no longer correspond to the changing needs. To address such current needs, most authorities have abandoned the enumerative method of defining extraditable crimes in favor of an eliminative approach. Until the mid-18th century, it was common practice to extradite political, military or religious offenders but in the late 18th and early 19th century, the opposite happened (Sadoff, 2016).

Jurisdictional and legal basis of requesting state to request for extradition

Another condition to ensure that extradition takes place is that the state requiring the process must have a basis to claim its judicial authority over a criminal. Since the offender is in another country, the requesting state must try to convict the criminal by further providing more legal evidence that indeed the criminal had committed a crime (Kiani, 2017).

Extradition request and supporting documentation

It is a requirement that for extradition proceedings to be initiated, the state seeking a request to extradite of a fugitive from another state must present an application to the authorities of the other state. A formal request for the arrest and surrender of the individual concerned must be transmitted through diplomatic channels unless the treaty between the two nations requires otherwise. Applicable conventions and treaties regularly provide that extradition will proceed under the laws of the requested State. While there is little variation in the type of information which the requesting state must submit, the applicable rules and procedures, as well as evidentiary standards, may differ substantially between jurisdictions (Nicholls, 2013).

The formal request must identify the person whose extradition is sought and specify why his or her surrender is wanted. Extradition treaties and agreements often require that the requesting state to submit an arrest warrant, a copy describing the law that applies to the accused person whose extradition is sought, a description of the allegations against the accused and also information that permits the identification of the accused. The above elements are usually considered sufficient to support a positive decision on an extradition request in civil law countries (Arnell, 2017).

Part 4: Manifestations of international criminal cooperation

Whenever possible, states have shown great international illegal cooperation to combat crime. Many countries in the world have embedded the conduct of extradition into their constitutions to provide a platform through which the country can cooperate with other states to prevent escalation of crime. The United States, for instance, has extradition treaties with over a hundred nations in the world. It is only a few states in the world where extradition law does not apply. Though the process of extradition of criminals is slow eventually, the due process of the law takes its course (Nicholls, 2013). A recent manifestation of international criminal cooperation was in the case involving drug kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, a legend in Mexico who has survived dramatic prison escapes and years of staying just ahead of the law. The drug lord was extradited in U.S.A by the Mexican state under the treaty shared between the two countries. Another case involves Einhorn from the United States who had been charged with his girlfriend's death. Einhorn fled the United States and settled in France, but in 1997 he was arrested and eventually extradited to the United States in 2001 to face the murder charge. Also, in another case, a Pakistani neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui was convicted of attempting to kill Americans in Afghanistan in 2008.She was found guilty of seven counts, including attempted murder and armed assault on U.S. officers (Arnell, 2017).

The availability of an international court; the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a step that furthers the manifestation of international cooperation in the fight against crime. The court investigates and prosecutes cases of gross human rights violation. Being an international court, it puts the international law in perspective thus helping countries to fight crime that goes beyond their jurisdiction. Moreover, multilateral agreements such as the commonwealth agreement are a manifestation of criminal cooperation. For instance, Commonwealth agreements are agreements

between Commonwealth countries adopted by the ministers of justice of the member countries of the Commonwealth. The two agreements aim at facilitating mutual legal assistance and extradition between these countries. These agreements are not treaties but declarations by each Member State agreeing to establish legislation that allows for extradition or mutual legal assistance between Commonwealth countries. In this regard, all Commonwealth countries are focused towards international cooperation in fighting crime (Kiani, 2017).

Conclusion

Extradition is evidently a source of international cooperation. It is a very crucial legal tool developed for countries to administer criminal justice. It is a practical solution for jurisdictional problems encountered by the states due to the sovereign constraints. It is the universally accepted method used by countries to abdicate an offender back to the state where the alleged offense was perpetrated so that the offender can be tried there for the crime he committed. Most domestic institutions recognize that the elimination of crime is necessary for maintaining peace and order in the society and that extradition is a paramount tool to act upon a fugitive attempting to evade the law by fleeing to another country. Not only does an individual country benefit, but also the international community. However slow the process may be, extradition offers states with confidence that criminals can never run away forever. Capital crimes committed by perpetual criminals cannot go unpunished. Indeed, in the era of globalization, more accessible and faster international transport, and an expanding chain of international crimes and criminals, no state can afford to operate in isolation. Countries need to cooperate with other nations to improve chances of suppressing crime in the world.