Countries with Laws Forbidding Extradition

Extradition is the act of extraditing or handing over someone who has committed an offense in one country to another country, mostly to face trial or serve a jail term. This could be done between countries as part of mutual legal assistance. However, some countries have enacted laws forbidding extradition, making it impossible to hand over offenders to other countries regardless of the offense committed. In this article, we will explore countries with laws forbidding extradition, the reasons behind such laws, and the implications for international law.

But first, let us take a look at the principles of extradition.

Principles of Extradition

Extradition is based on the principles of comity and reciprocity. The principle of comity refers to the recognition and respect for the laws and judicial decisions of another country. In other words, countries are expected to cooperate with each other in criminal matters, as long as it does not contradict their own laws and sovereignty.

Reciprocity, on the other hand, implies mutual benefits from extradition agreements. Countries are expected to receive equal treatment when requesting the extradition of an offender and when being requested to extradite an offender.

When a person commits an offense in one country and flees to another, the legal process for extradition can be a lengthy one. The country seeking extradition would have to provide evidence that the person committed the offense and that the offense is an offense in the country where the fugitive is currently residing.

Countries that have laws forbidding extradition could create an obstacle for the country seeking extradition. However, the reasons behind such laws vary from country to country.

Countries with Laws Forbidding Extradition

Russia

In Russia, the constitution forbids the extradition of Russian citizens to foreign countries. This law applies to all Russian citizens, regardless of the offense committed. The law also prohibits the extradition of stateless persons and refugees.

The Russian Federation law declares that the extradition of a citizen or former citizen of the Russian Federation does not meet the national interests of the Russian Federation if the person is accused or sentenced by a foreign state for a crime that is not recognized in the Russian Federation, or if the person has been acquitted or exonerated in Russia.

The implications of this law mean that Russia is a safe haven for Russian citizens who commit crimes abroad. In recent years, many high-profile cases involving Russian citizens accused of crimes like hacking and money laundering have made headlines.

China

China also has laws forbidding extradition of Chinese nationals to foreign countries. The law applies to all citizens of the People’s Republic of China, including those from Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan.

China’s extradition law states that no Chinese citizen may be extradited to foreign countries. Exceptions could be made for persons suspected of committing offenses relating to terrorism, separatism, or religious extremism.

The law further stipulates that, for cases that are not provided for by a treaty or agreement concluded between the People’s Republic of China and the foreign country, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China shall be responsible for approving or rejecting the request.

The implications of this law mean that Chinese nationals who commit crimes abroad and flee back to China are safe. The case of Interpol’s former president, Meng Hongwei, who was arrested in China after being accused of accepting bribes, highlights the implications of China’s extradition laws.

North Korea

North Korea does not allow its citizens to be extradited to foreign countries. This law applies to all North Korean citizens, including those who have fled the country.

The law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) states that no DPRK national may be extradited to a foreign country or handed over to a foreign country by extradition or any other means. The only exception is when the DPRK National Assembly permits it.

The implications of this law are that North Korea is a safe haven for North Koreans who commit crimes abroad. Given the secrecy surrounding the North Korean regime, it is difficult to estimate the number of North Korean fugitives residing in foreign countries.

Iran

Iran forbids the extradition of its nationals to foreign countries, and it applies to all Iranian citizens. In Iranian law, this is known as The Principle of Non-Surrender, which is based on the country’s sovereignty and national security.

The Iranian constitution states that no individual can be extradited to a foreign state, even if the individual is wanted for a crime punishable by capital punishment or life imprisonment.

The implications of this law are that Iranian nationals who commit crimes abroad and are wanted for extradition have a safe haven in Iran. In recent years, there have been several high-profile cases involving Iranian nationals charged with crimes like money laundering.

Cuba

Cuba is another country with laws forbidding extradition. The Cuban constitution forbids the extradition of nationals, regardless of the offense committed.

The law states that no Cuban may be subjected to extradition, even for political offenses, except in cases where a treaty or agreement provides for it.

The implications of this law mean that Cuban nationals who commit crimes abroad and flee to Cuba are safe. This was evident in the case of Joanne Chesimard, a fugitive who was granted asylum in Cuba after being convicted of killing a New Jersey state trooper.

Implications for International Law

The laws forbidding extradition could have significant implications for international law.

The principle of comity requires that countries cooperate with each other in criminal matters, but laws forbidding extradition could create an obstacle to this cooperation. When countries refuse to surrender fugitives, it could undermine the principle of comity and cause tension between the countries involved.

Furthermore, the laws forbidding extradition could also create a safe haven for fugitives who commit crimes in foreign countries. This could lead to an increase in transnational crimes, as offenders would feel they have immunity from prosecution in the countries with laws forbidding extradition.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the laws forbidding extradition in Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and Cuba have significant implications for international law. These laws create a safe haven for fugitives who commit crimes in foreign countries and could undermine the principle of comity.

The reasons behind these laws vary from country to country, and it is up to each country to determine its laws on extradition. However, as the world becomes increasingly globalized, it is essential that countries work together to combat transnational crimes and uphold the principles of comity and reciprocity.

Some countries are notorious for being wholly resistant to extraditing their naturalized residents. Germany, for one, has had both its federal Supreme Court and federal Constitutional Court rule against removing its nationals outright via extradition. France, Switzerland, China and Japan, too, have historically been largely unwilling to cooperate with foreign governments who wish to remove a criminal suspect from his or her “homeland.”

Nonetheless, some countries, while writing similar provisions into their constitutions against petitions to remove their people, will make exceptions according to the date of the crime. An example would be Brazil; while the country’s national law prohibits the extradition of its citizens, if charges or convictions were accrued prior to naturalization, a federal court might be willing to surrender the suspect/convict.

Then again, rather than removing a person, a country may simply remove the stipulation on not wanting to remove its nationals. Indeed, anti-extradition policies are not set in stone. Extradition treaties may be altered or revoked altogether, and complete non-extradition policies have been overturned in the past. A notable case of this transpired in 2000 when El Salvador amended its constitution to remove conditions that barred its nationals from extradition, paving the way for extradition treaty negotiations with the United States.