Editing Extradition (section)

=== International tensions ===
[[File:Baltic extration - 1946.jpg|thumb|Swedish extradition of German and Baltic soldiers to the [[Soviet Union]] in January 1946]]
[[File:Miguelrodriguez-extradition.png|thumb|[[Cali Cartel]] boss [[Miguel Rodríguez Orejuela]] extradited from Colombia to the United States.]]
[[File:Juan Carlos Ramirez Abadia extradition.jpg|thumb|[[Juan Carlos Ramírez Abadía]] being extradited to face charges in the United States.]]
[[File:Viktor Bout Extradited to US.jpg|thumb|[[Viktor Bout]] extradited to the United States aboard a [[Drug Enforcement Administration]] [[Airplane|plane]].]]

The refusal of a country to extradite suspects or criminals to another may lead to international relations being strained. Often, the country to which extradition is refused will accuse the other country of refusing extradition for political reasons (regardless of whether or not this is justified). A case in point is that of [[Ira Einhorn]], in which some US commentators pressured President [[Jacques Chirac]] of France, who does not intervene in legal cases, to permit extradition when the case was held up due to differences between French and American human rights law. Another long-standing example is [[Roman Polanski]] whose extradition was pursued by California for over 20 years. For a brief period he was placed under arrest in Switzerland, however subsequent legal appeals there prevented extradition.

The questions involved are often complex when the country from which suspects are to be extradited is a democratic country with a [[rule of law]]. Typically, in such countries, the final decision to extradite lies with the national executive (prime minister, [[President (government title)|president]] or equivalent). However, such countries typically allow extradition defendants recourse to the law, with multiple appeals. These may significantly slow down procedures. On the one hand, this may lead to unwarranted international difficulties, as the public, politicians and journalists from the requesting country will ask their executive to put pressure on the executive of the country from which extradition is to take place, while that executive may not in fact have the authority to deport the suspect or criminal on their own. On the other hand, certain delays, or the unwillingness of the local prosecution authorities to present a good extradition case before the court on behalf of the requesting state, may possibly result from the unwillingness of the country's executive to extradite.

Even though the United States has an extradition treaty with Japan, most extraditions are not successful due to Japan's domestic laws. For the United States to be successful, they must present their case for extradition to the Japanese authorities. However, certain evidence is barred from being in these proceedings such as the use of confessions, searches or electronic surveillance. In most cases involving international drug trafficking, this kind of evidence constitutes the bulk of evidence gathered in the investigation on a suspect for a drug-related charge. Therefore, this usually hinders the United States from moving forward with the extradition of a suspect.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Surena|first1=André M.|last2=Grove|first2=Margaret A.|last3=Perl|first3=Raphael|last4=Zagaris|first4=Bruce|last5=Blum|first5=Jack A.|date=1990|title=International Drug Traffic|journal=Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law)|volume=84|pages=1–12|jstor=25658526|issn=0272-5037}}</ref>

There is at present controversy in the United Kingdom about the [[Extradition Act 2003]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_210503.pdf |title=Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the United States of America |access-date=6 July 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060715051153/http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_210503.pdf |archive-date=15 July 2006 }}</ref> which dispenses with the need for a ''prima facie'' case for extradition. This came to a head over the extradition of [[the Natwest Three]] from the UK to the U.S., for their alleged fraudulent conduct related to [[Enron]]. Several British political leaders were heavily critical of the British government's handling of the issue.<ref>{{cite web|author=Oliver King and agencies |url=http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,1812471,00.html |title=Lib Dem leader joins bankers' extradition battle |publisher=Politics.guardian.co.uk |date=4 July 2006 |access-date=29 July 2014}}</ref>

In 2013, the United States submitted extradition requests to many nations for former National Security Agency employee [[Edward Snowden]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://usdoj.com/7663/38803/a/usa-requests-provisional-arrest-warrants-from-various-countries-against-edward-s |title=USA requests provisional arrest warrants from various countries against Edward S |access-date=19 April 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170628142406/http://usdoj.com/7663/38803/a/usa-requests-provisional-arrest-warrants-from-various-countries-against-edward-s |archive-date=28 June 2017 }}</ref> It criticized Hong Kong for allowing him to leave despite an extradition request.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/11/world/nsa-snowden/index.html | work=CNN | title=U.S. criticizes China's handling of Snowden case – CNN.com | date=12 July 2013}}</ref>