Encyclopedia Britannica 1963 [09].pdf

(163371 KB) Pobierz
THE
UNIVERSITY
OF
CHICAGO
The Encyclopadid B~iturzaicu
i s
pu blirhed with the editoriul advice ofthe fucz~lties
of
The University of Chicdgo und ofu
committee of membeys of the fucu
Zties
of Oxford,,Cumbridge
and London univer~itier
dnd of u committee
ut The Urziver~ty
Tororzto
of
"
LET
KNOWLEDGE GROW FROM MORE
TO
MORE
AND
THUS
BE
HUMAN LIFE ENRICHED."
A
New
Stlyuey
qf
Utliz?e~uzl
Knowledge
Volume
9
E N C Y C L O P E D I A
BRITANNICA, INC.
W I L L I A N
BENTON,
PUBLISHER
CHICAGO
LONDON
TORONTO
GENEVA
SYDNEY
PRINTED IN
THE
U.
S .
A.
FOUNDED
Volume
9
E
XTRADITION
may be briefly described as the surren- mitted outside its own boundaries except where the protection
of special national interests is at stake. I n view of the solidarity
of nations in the reprerjsion of criminality, how,ever! a state, though
refusing to impose direct penal sanctions to offenses committed
abroad. is usually ~villingto co-operate otherwise in bringing the
perpetrator to justice lest he go unpunished. Some writers on
the law of nations, including the celebrated Grotius, have asserted
that states have an international duty either to punish or to
extradite, as least in cases of common crimes. T h e preponderance
of modern theory and practice, however, recognizes that extradi-
tion and the conclusion of extradition treaties are merely matters
of comity and that customary international law establishes no
obligations for a state to grant extradition.
IVhile instances of the surrender of criminals and even of the
conclusion of general treaties on the subject are reported for
antiquity as well as for the middle ages, extradition as a legal in-
stitution developed chiefly after the end of the 18th century.
Originally, extradition \\.as treated as a question of diplomatic
expediency and a matter within the general police powers of the
executive. but gradually it was surrounded with legal safeguards
for the protection of the individual and was placed under the super-
intendence of the judiciary. Many nations have passed compre-
hensive legislation regulating the subject.
E x t r a d i t i o n Acts.-The pioneer in this development was Bel-
gium. which passed a general extradition law on Oct.
I
,
1833.
T h e
law specified seven extraditable crimes and a number of conditions
to be stipulated in treaties concluded in accordance with this stat-
ute. I t was supplemented and in part superseded by legislation
of
1874,
which greatly enlarged the catalogue of extraditable of-
fenses. The United States adopted a statute regulating interna-
tional extradition in
1848.
I t had the purpose of setting a t rest
certain doubts as to ~ ~ h e t h extradition had become a subject of
er
judicial cognizance and of clarifying the procedure to be followed.
I t reirained from establishing limitations on extradition but re-
stricted its applicability to cases arising under extradition treaties.
T h t Setherlands followed the Belgian example with a n act of
1849,
~ h i c h replaced in
18;
j
by further legislation.
was
I n Great Britain passage of a general extradition law was recom-
mended by a select committee of the house of commons in
1868.
I t s proposals prompted the Extradition act of
1870,
which has
der of an alleged or convicted criminal by one state to an-
other. More precisely, extradition may be defined as the
process by which one state upon the request of another
surrenders to the latter a person found within its jurisdic-
tion for trial and punishment (including preventive measures) or.
if he has been already convicted. only for punishment.
on
account
of a crime punishable by the laws of the requesting state and com-
mitted outside the territory of the requested state. This purpose,
direction and request by the receiving state differentiate extradi-
tion from other measures for the forcible removal of undesirable
persons. such as banishment. expulsion and deportation.
K i n d s of Extradition.- Extradition between independent na-
tions not linked by any constitutional ties is designated as interna-
tional extradition as distinguished from interstate extradition.
The latter is the surrender of criminals between states that form
part of a federal system of government without unitary adminis-
tration of criminal justice; as in the United States of America
(see
art.
4,
sec.
2
of the
L.S.
constitution). In some nations
lvith a federal government, however: the apprehension and transfer
of criminals from one constituent member to another for trial or
punishment is regulated by federal legislation of an inclusive and
streamlined type. Thus, Australia (Service and Execution of
Process act) and Canada (criminai code) require for an interstate
or interprovincial surrender, respectively, merely that a warrant
for apprehension and conveyance, issued in one state or province.
be endorsed for execution by a qualified officer of the state or prov-
ince where the person sought is found. In Switzerland the unifica-
tion of criminal justice has eliminated the former need for
intercantonal extradition. IVithin the British Commonwealth the
surrender of accused persons from one part of the dominions of
the cro\vn to another is similarly accomplished by a broadly appli-
cable and simplified procedure, regulated either directly by the
British Fugitive Offenders act of
1881
or by separate dominion
legislation modeled after that act, such as the Canadian Fugitive
Offenders act (originally enacted in
1882).
C h a r a c t e r a n d History.- Extradition plays an importa~ltrole
in the international battle against crime. I t owes its existence to
the so-called principle of territoriality of criminal law, accord-
ing to which a state will not apply its penal statutes to acts com-

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika:

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin