Scribd
Upload
9 views1 page

Extradition

Extradition involves delivering an accused individual to the state where the crime is alleged to have occurred, with states having the right to grant asylum unless bound by extradition treaties. Political criminals are generally not extradited, a practice that originated after the French Revolution, and there are specific restrictions such as the rule of specialty and double criminality. Extradition requires sufficient evidence and a formal treaty, with certain exceptions for military and religious crimes.

Uploaded by

C O M R A D E
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
9 views1 page

Extradition

Extradition involves delivering an accused individual to the state where the crime is alleged to have occurred, with states having the right to grant asylum unless bound by extradition treaties. Political criminals are generally not extradited, a practice that originated after the French Revolution, and there are specific restrictions such as the rule of specialty and double criminality. Extradition requires sufficient evidence and a formal treaty, with certain exceptions for military and religious crimes.

Uploaded by

C O M R A D E
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Extradition

“Extradition is the delivery of an accused individual to the State on whose territory he is alleged to have
committed a crime, by the State on whose territory the alleged criminal happens to be for the time being”.
Grotius says, “It is the duty of each State either to punish the criminals or to return them to the States
where they have committed crime”.
However, “States have always upheld their right to grant asylum to foreign individuals as an interference
from their territorial supremacy, those cases excepted, of course, which fall under stipulations of specials
extradition treaties, if any”.
Besides, I.L does not recognize any general duty of States in respect of extradition. It depends on the
provisions of the existing extradition treaties.
“There is no universally recognized practice that there can be no extradition except under a treaty, for,
some countries grant extradition without a treaty”. ~ Wheaton’s I.L
Restrictions on surrender
i. Non-extradition of political criminal:
Extradition for political criminals is not allowed.
This practice began with French revolution, 1789.
Difficulties arise as the term political criminal is not perfectly defined.
Case: Re Castioni – The Queen’s bench of England held that Castioni was guilty of a political party and
there he could not be extradited.
Attentat Clause – Murder of the head of a foreign government, or of a member of his family, should not
be considered a political crime. (Enacted by Belgium in 1856 – then Britain and many other Europeans
States also adopted it)
Swiss solution to the problem – 1892
a. Extradition of military criminals is not allowed.
b. Similarly of religious crimes.
c. Rule of specialty – The extradited criminal is only subject to the law relating to the crime for
which he was extradited. Case: U.S v Rauscher (1886)
d. Double criminality – The crime for which extradition is claimed should be crime in both the
countries.
e. There should be sufficient evidence for crimes relating to extradition.
f. When a person is charged with having been an accessory in a crime committed in a foreign
State which seeks his extradition, it is not necessary that at the time of offence the said person
must be present in the said foreign State. Case: Rex v Godfrey
g. There must be a formal treaty of extradition, not simply an agreement or notification.

You might also like