The Relationship of Prosecution by the State of the Victim and the State Where the Accused Is Present in light of the Obligation Prosecute or Extradite in the 1973 Convention

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Faculty Member of the Institution for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT)

2 Assistant Professor of International Law at the University of Tehran, Faculty of Law and Political Science

10.22034/jclc.2024.421620.1926

Abstract

The obligation to prosecute or extradite is a primary obligation that is mainly included in treaties aimed at combating impunity. The initial basis for fulfilling this obligation is the State in whose territory the accused is present. In this case, the concerned State should either respond positively to the possible extradition request of another State regarding the accused or initiate the prosecution of the accused. However, the question that may be raised is that if a State party to the relevant treaty other than the State that holds the accused, can it be said that due to the absence of the accused, there is no possibility of a trial, or at least it can be considered conducting preliminary investigations in order to extradite? In fact, what is the ratio of the investigation by the State of the victim and the State where the accused is present? In this article, by examining the study of the International Law Commission and the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, and with a special focus on the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Missions, it is suggested that, on the one hand, conducting preliminary investigations is a condition for requesting extradition and on the other hand, the delay in prosecution and trial will also be considered a violation of the obligation to prosecute.

Keywords


“US Treaties in Force,” accessed October 20, 2023, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/TIF-2020-Full-website-view.pdf
18 U.S. Code § 112 - Protection of foreign officials, official guests, and internationally protected persons, at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/112
A/CN.4/579, Comments and observations received from Governments, 2007.
Ardebili M.A and Mirfallah Nasiri N., “Enforcement of International Criminal Law Conventions Establishing a “Duty to Extradite or Prosecute” (aut dedere aut judicare) in Iran”. The Judiciary Law Journal, 66 (2017): 7-35.  https://doi.org/10.22106/jlj.2017.26773 (in Persian)
Beigzadeh E. and Mirfallah Nasiri N., “Duty to Extradite or Prosecute” (aut dedere aut judicare) in Customary Law and International Jurisprudence”. Law Research Quarterly, 66 (2014): 1-30.  https://doi.org/10.22106/jlj.2017.26773 (in Persian)
Draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against diplomatic agents and other internationally protected persons with commentaries, 1972.
Kittichaisaree, Kriangsak, The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. (in English)
Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), ICJ Reports 2012.
Ramezani Ghavamabadi M.H. “International Responsibility Arising from the Breach of the Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute in the light of the International Court of Justice in the case of Belgium against Senegal”. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 8 (2017): 5-38.   https://doi.org/10.22106/jlj.2017.26773 (in Persian)
Schmidt, Roland, Art.8 The Convention as a basis for Extradition, in, Nowak, Birk, Monina (eds.), The United Nations Convention Against Torture and its Optional Protocol: A Commentary (2nd Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. (in English)   
Schmidt, Roland. Art.7 Aut Dedere aut Judicare, in, Manfred Nowak, Moritz Birk, Giuliana Monina (eds.), The United Nations Convention Against Torture and its Optional Protocol: A Commentary (2nd Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. (in English)
Shabankareh. Y and Raisis. L. “Legal Analyze of Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite in the light of 20 July 2012 Judgement of International Court of Justic (Belgium v Senegal)”. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 35 (2021): 110-137.https://doi.org/10.22054/jclr.2021.42009.1914 (in Persian)
Statement by Mr. Hossein Gharibi Counsellor, Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran Before The Sixth Committee 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly New York, 6 November 2012, accessed October 20, 2023, https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/67/pdfs/statements/ilc/iran_3.pdf;
Statement by Professor Djamchid Momtaz Legal Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran before the Sixth Committee 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, New York, 5 November 2013, accessed October 20, 2023, https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/68/pdfs/statements/ilc/iran_3.pdf
Statement by the represntative of Iran before the Sixth Committee, 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly on Agenda item 81: Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its sixty-third and sixty-fifth sessions, 5, accessed October 20, 2023, https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/68/pdfs/statements/ilc/iran_3.pdf
Survey of multilateral instruments which may be of relevance for the work of the International Law Commission on the topic “The obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare)”, Study by the Secretariat, accessed October 20, 2023, https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_630.pdf
The 2004 Model Law on Extradition prepared by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, accessed October 20, 2023, https://www.unodc.org/pdf/model_law_extradition.pdf
The obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare), Final Report of the International Law Commission, 2014