See 7 FAM 1613.4(c) (“For political reasons, the United States will no longer negotiate new extradition treaties if the partner country is unwilling or unable to commit to extraditing nationals.”). The United States has extradition treaties with more than 100 countries, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. These agreements vary from country to country, but they generally adopt a “dual criminality” approach to extradition and classify all crimes punishable in both jurisdictions as extradited. This means that a person can be extradited to another state to prosecute or punish crimes committed in the jurisdiction of the requesting country. The Council on Foreign Relations reports that the U.S. Marshal`s Office has handled between 350 and 600 deliveries to the U.S. each year over the past twelve years. (Drug king Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman Loera, whom the U.S. transferred from Mexico in 2017, is the most notorious criminal to have been extradited in recent history.) Building on a practice that dates back to ancient times, States falsify extradition treaties in order to prosecute refugees and other wanted persons in remote jurisdictions.
Extradition has become increasingly important in the face of the spread of transnational criminal organisations, including those involved in terrorism, drug trafficking, counterfeiting and cybercrime. However, in some countries, there are no extradition agreements with the United States. This means that a person convicted of a crime in a country does not need to be returned to that country to be tried or punished. Even in countries with existing treaties, geopolitical issues can lead to disputes over extradition. Countries with extradition treaties with the United States that are known to deny extradition requests are Ecuador, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Iceland, Switzerland, Venezuela and Zimbabwe. On the other hand, some countries without an extradition agreement, such as Yemen in the Middle East, are known to return refugees. Certain principles of extradition are common in many countries. For example, many States reject any obligation to extradite their own nationals; In fact, the constitutions of Slovenia and, until 1997, Colombia prohibited the extradition of their nationals. In Argentina, Great Britain and the United States, nationals can only be extradited if the current extradition treaty allows it. Another common principle is dual criminality, which stipulates that the alleged offence for which extradition is requested must be punishable both in the requesting and requested countries. According to the principle of specificity, the requesting State may prosecute the extradition officer only for the offence for which extradition has been granted and may not extradite the detainee to a third country for offences committed before the first extradition.
Although States have recognized certain exceptions to this principle – and certain rules allow the extradition officer to waive it – it is crucial for the exercise of the right to asylum. If the requesting State were allowed to convict an opponent of extradition for an offence corresponding to its objectives (e.B. because of a political crime), the right to asylum would suffer under both national and international law. Extradition is regulated within countries by extradition laws and between countries by diplomatic treaties (see treaty). The first extradition law was adopted by Belgium in 1833, which also adopted the first law on the right of asylum. Extradition laws specify the crimes that may be extradited, clarify extradition procedures and safeguards, and establish the relationship between the law and international treaties. National legislation differs considerably in the relationship between laws and extradition treaties. In the United States, extradition can only be granted on the basis of a treaty and only if Congress has not passed laws to the contrary, a situation that also exists in Britain, Belgium and the Netherlands. Germany and Switzerland deliver without formal agreement in cases where their governments and the requesting State have exchanged declarations of reciprocity. Although there has long been a tendency to reject extradition requests in the absence of a binding international commitment, refugees are sometimes extradited by States on the basis of local legislation or as an act of goodwill.
Nevertheless, countries that do not have extradition treaties with certain other countries (or with respect to certain types of crimes) have been considered refuges for refugees. Once the requested state has made a decision on a U.S. extradition request, it will notify the U.S. government. If the request is denied, the OIA may work with prosecutors and the State Department to explore other options for obtaining custody of the person, such as .B. Expulsion.55 There are two types of extradition treaties: list agreements and dual criminal law agreements. The most common and traditional is the list contract, which contains a list of the crimes for which a suspect is extradited. Dual criminal law treaties generally allow the extradition of a suspect if the sentence in both countries is more than one year in prison.