Prosecution and Extradition of Person having committed acts of terror - Essay Example

and Section # of Prosecution and Extradition of Person having committed acts of terror IntroductionThe topic of prosecution of terrorism, and terrorism itself, has been under a lot of discussion in the recent past. Since the terrorist attack of September 11, America has been personally involved in the war against terror and has raised many ethical concerns in many different societies of the world.This paper sheds light over one of the issues. Under Article 7, if a terrorist commits an act of terrorism against a country that is not his own country, then that country has the right to prosecute him.

Although this has its pros and cons, I personally disagree with the article and this paper will discuss my argument. ArgumentsWhen a person commits an act of terrorism in a foreign country, he should not be prosecuted in the same country because he might not get a full safety of his rights (Your Human Rights in a Foreign Country). The jury may be biased against the person because of his nationality and this may overwhelm the evidences present in the case. Hence, even if the accused is not guilty of the crime and there may be slight evidences of his innocence the biasness of the jury might cause them to sentence the person.

Secondly, the accused is the national of another country and therefore is subject to prosecution by his native country. Countries have rights over their citizens and when they violate those rights they should be punished accordingly (Rhodes). Another reason to prosecute in the homeland is the difference in terms of the penalty and the actual sentence. For instance, in the European countries people who commit an act of terrorism or plan others are sent to detention facilities, those who murder others, are offered the capital punishment in some countries while in others they are sent to prisons (Death Penalty).

On the other hand in the Arab world or in Muslim countries the sentences and the modes of punishment are different. People who kill others are beheaded and the ones who plan for acts of terrorism are also handed in strict punishments (Nasir). There is no doubt that such people should be prosecuted and handed with the worst punishments possible but they should also be given a justified chance to prove them innocent in front of an unbiased court of law. It is essential because people who get arrested are not always the ones’ who are the culprits, sometimes even innocent people are picked up.

Furthermore, when these accused are declared guilty and sent to detention facilities, the behavior towards such people is extremely brutal and sometimes even the most basic rights of humans are neglected. For example, terrorists who were declared guilty and were sent to the Guantanamo Bay Detention facility by the United States Department of Justice were being subject to the worst kind of conditions imaginable (Guantánamo Bay Naval Base (Cuba)). All over the world ethical issues were raised against the running of the detention facility as it was biased against the detainees and they were being subjected to immense torture both physical and emotional.

ConclusionAs a result, it is evident that people who commit acts of terrorism against foreign countries should be sent back to their native countries and kept under trial there. So that they are neither subjected to the biasness during trials and nor the biasness in the detention facilities. Works CitedDeath Penalty. 19 February 2010 .Guantánamo Bay Naval Base (Cuba). February 2010 .Nasir, Hesham. "Criminal Justice and the Prosecution in the Arab World." Study for the UNDP (2004).Rhodes, Sybil.

"States and their Citizens Abroad." 2007.Your Human Rights in a Foreign Country. 19 February 2010 .