NCJ Number
27906
Date Published
1975
Length
7 pages
Annotation
EXISTING EXTRADITION LAWS AND THE PROBLEMS OF APPLYING THESE LAWS TO ACTS OF TERRORISM ARE REVIEWED, AND PROPOSALS FOR INCLUDING ACTS OF TERRORISM IN THE FIELD OF EXTRADICTABLE OFFENSES ARE OUTLINED.
Abstract
ISSUES IN DETERMINING A WORKING DEFINITION OF TERRORISM ARE FIRST DISCUSSED. WITH RESPECT TO EXTRADICTION, IT IS NECESSARY TO MAKE A TERMINOLOGICAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN TERRORISM AND POLITICAL CRIMES, SINCE POLITICAL CRIMES ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED NONEXTRADICTABLE OFFENSES. THE AUTHOR PROPOSES THAT A CONVENTION BE ELABORATED WHICH WOULD COVER CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL RULES. AMONG THE RULES ARE: (1) ALL STATES SHOULD BE VESTED WITH UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION WITH RESPECT TO CRIMES OF TERRORISM, REGARDLESS OF THE LOCATION OF THE CRIME AND THE NATIONALITY OF THE OFFENDER OR HIS VICTIM; (2) THE CONVENTION MUST BE REGARDED AS A MULTILATERAL EXTRADITION TREATY, SO THAT EXTRADITION IS GRANTED REGARDLESS WHETHER THE CRIME IS MENTIONED IN ANY LIST OF EXTRADITABLE OFFENSES IN ANY OTHER LEGAL INSTRUMENT (TREATY OR DOMESTIC LAW); (3) TERRORISM MUST BE CONSIDERED A COMMON CRIME FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXTRADITION, SO THAT THE GENERAL RULE AGAINST THE EXTRADITION OF POLITICAL OFFENDERS WILL BE UNAPPLICABLE; AND (4) THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS MUST BE UPHELD. EXTRADITION IS NOT TO BE GRANTED WHEN THE INDIVIDUAL SOUGHT IS TO BE TRIED BY AN EXCEPTIONAL TRIBUNAL OR UNDER A PROCEDURE VIOLATING FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)