Talk:Extradition

message: Glw53 (talk) 23:56, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Course assignment signature 

message: This appears to be a commercial plug? If anyone can confirm, it should be removed or reworded. I think this would belong better under rendition anyway.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbertram (talk • contribs) 05:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference for FORCE-1

message: Does anyone have a list of non-extradition countries for common english-speaking countries?  It would add to the article.  I havn't been able to find any decent information.  --ChrisRuvolo 19:46, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-extradition countries

message: Did the state of California request the US government to convey a request to France that Roman Polanski should be prosecuted? I know at least one case where a French citizen was (successfully, if I remember well) prosecuted in France for a murder committed in the US. David.Monniaux 18:47, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Polanski 

message: In the Restrictions section Soering v. United Kingdom is mentioned as a prominent case. Could someone please write about this as I'm sure it would add to the knowledge of the topic! Cheers. Witty lama 18:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soering v. United Kingdom 

message: Nothing about this story? It's been big news in Britain for a long time now. 81.159.56.123 03:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Litvinenko/Lugovoi? 

message: Does anybody have any numbers on how many people are concerned by extradition? I guess this kind of statistics would be quite difficult to gather, but I think it would be interesting to know, roughly, for example, the number of extraditions from the US or to the US (or to/from some other major countries or regions).80.194.194.190 (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some numbers? 

message: In the Extradition and abduction section, why is CIA specified? The CIA is an agency of the United States.  If the CIA performed an action, the United States performed that action. Kevdav63 (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the same thing. All of the other items in the list specify the country, not the specific organization. Since Kevdav63's comment has been here for more than a month, I'll go ahead and make the change. If there's a good reason why it should be CIA and not USA, please tell us here. YardsGreen (talk) 06:09, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIA = USA 

message: The statement that dual criminality involves an act which is a crime in both countries needs clarifying and perhaps amendment. In particular, does it not imply that the relevent  "act" must already have been judged (presumably in a proper court) to have been a crime. How can someone be extradited for questioning about an act which is not a clearly established crime? Can one extradite someone simply because of the possibility that a crime may have been committed? If so, there appears to be no defence against extradition.Paulhummerman (talk) 02:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: People are extradited to face trial, that's all. I can, at least, state for a fact that no European country permits its citizens to be extradited 'for the purposes of investigation'. Neither does the United States. Thus, the US (say) would request extradition on the basis of a grand jury indictment, a UK request would come from the Crown Prosecution Service. Accordingly, it's readily apparent whether dual criminality applies - the requesting country must have charged the individual with a crime that's recognised by the criminal justice system of the requestee nation. It's topical; the age of sex consent in the UK is 16 years and therefore, (absent certain aggravating features such as proven 'grooming' or abuse of a position of authority), it isn't possible to extradite a British citizen on the bases of 'illegal sexual intercourse with a 17 year old'. Members of certain royal families will take comfort from this. 2A01:4B00:AE0E:6200:DC7D:D977:5E79:92BB (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assange 

message: The article says that Germany doesn'e extradite it's own citizens, yet Christine Schürrer was extratited to Sweden. Is the article wrong or is there something else in that story?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.103.209.223 (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Own nationals  

message: The section on abductions is a mess. The first two check out, but the third looks very dubious. Isang Yun's article mentions nothing about an extrajudicial abduction and the only source it gives is in Korean. If anyone happens to speak the language, it would be nice it they could check the source and confirm it says what this article claims.
I say this also because several of the other names on the list are incorrect. Camilla Broe was extradited legally (though controversially)  to the US and the same goes for Aimal Kasi. Abdullah Ocalan's extradition involved Turkey; not the US. Martin Mubanga's capture was an extraordinary rendition; not an extrajudicial abduction. Same goes for Khaled El-Masri. That's five completely false accusations against the US made in that one section (the Israeli ones, surprise surprise, all check out). 
Also, why does the list only contain abductions by Israel and the US? I know those aren't the only countries which do/have carried out illegal extraditions (look at North Korea or the USSR), so why the one-sidedness?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.43.72 (talk) 10:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abductions 

message: It would be helpful if a section could be added on this, as requested above some time back.  For the second time I came looking after a reference to inter-State extradition in an article, for example in the Lead of Whitey Bulger. Davidships (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're looking for Extradition law in the United States. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 14:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Between sub-federal jurisdictions (e.g., U.S. States) again 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Extradition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121014042245/http://www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/leg/index.html to http://www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/leg/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612123848/http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1507.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1507.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Extradition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060715051153/http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_210503.pdf to http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_210503.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170628142406/http://usdoj.com/7663/38803/a/usa-requests-provisional-arrest-warrants-from-various-countries-against-edward-s to http://usdoj.com/7663/38803/a/usa-requests-provisional-arrest-warrants-from-various-countries-against-edward-s
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2Fta06%2FERES1507.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090126061153/http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/ to http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:58, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The list of examples currently includes Hong Kong. I believe this is incorrect. Although most of Hong Kong's extradition agreements do allow for the refusal of extradition for the death penalty (usually discretionary, occasionally mandatory), its laws (Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, Cap. 503, Section 5) do not require any restrictions on the death penalty, and two of its current (2019) extradition agreements have no restriction on extradition for the death penalty (Malaysia and Singapore). Thus, Hong Kong is not a jurisdiction that "will not allow extradition if the death penalty may be imposed".
If you think this is incorrect, please correct me with a citation. ("Hong Kong" was originally added in revision 857059053 without a citation...)
Henry stuffedcow (talk) 05:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of jurisdictions that do not extradite for death sentences 

message: hi. In the case of Ramil Safarov, can one talk of extradition, or is it just a case of physical transfer for humanitarian reasons (incarceration in one's home country)? In other words: does "extradition" necessarily imply that the country applying for it intends to bring the accused to trial? With Safarov, the declared intention was to have him serve the already decided period of incarceration "at home", with the actual, hidden intention of pardoning him altogether and de facto erasing his conviction (see back payment of salary for the years served in Hungary, official treatment as "national hero"). Once this is clarified, the definition of the article might need to be changed - if the extradition application necessarily needs to claim (rightfully or falsely, it doesn't matter here) that its purpose is to bring the person in case to justice, or have them serve time according to a preexisting legal sentencing. As it is now, this important aspect is not touched upon. If indeed this is the case, please also replace "extradition" (wikilinked) with "transfer" in the Armenia–Hungary relations#Severing of diplomatic relations paragraph. Thank you. Arminden (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extradition or transfer? 

message: hi. An anonymous "editor", in a clear case of vandalism, removed a large chunk of the article (over 7000 bytes), adding "JOHN KINCHELO SUCKS AT LIFE". Somebody quickly removed the "joke", but failed to put the material back in, and so it stayed for 12 years. Now I found it and placed it back in. I am of course aware that the article has greatly advanced since, but it may well be that part of the vandalised material is valuable and missing in the current version. Or not (anymore), and then it's up to you to remove it again. I have no legal background whatsoever, here's where I stop with my contribution. Please take a look.
The vandal's "edit" is here (Revision as of 17:02, 13 November 2008).
I am pinging you two, Blue-Haired Lawyer and Enthusiast01, because you seem to be the last two active editors who have contributed in a substantive way to this article (definition in the lead and/or content). Thanks, Arminden (talk) 02:36, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Arminden, well spotted! — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 12:18, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put back in material removed in act of vandalism back in 2008, but needs reworking 

message: Would Indiana come to Oregon on a possion of marijuana possion of syringe possion of paraphernalia 2603:300F:7BC:0:85D3:D9BF:1E06:73A1 (talk) 14:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime 

message: In the first place, while the headline of the cited article states "1 million", the text merely states "hundreds of thousands".
In the second place, this article from the Hong Kong Free Press (which appears to refer to the same demonstration) refers merely to "tens of thousands" of protesters.
New York Times Story (publication date of June 9, 2019) says there were 240,000 protesters "at the peak" of the demonstration, and CNBC reported "over 200,000" protesters.  The "million" figure has been attributed to Jimmy Sham, spokesperson for the pro-democracy group that organized the protest. Fabrickator (talk) 02:01, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed number of Hong Kong demonstrators