The extradition question

[GunMan]

Pakistan has to extradite terror suspects: India

January 05, 2009 18:46 IST
Last Updated: January 05, 2009 20:03 IST


India on Monday demanded from Pakistan the extradition of perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks so that they can be brought to justice in India.

It also said that it cannot believe a commando-type operation that was in evidence in Mumbai attacks could have taken place without anybody in the Pakistani establishment knowing about it.

"Our goals are clear. We want the perpetrators to be brought to Indian justice," Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon told reporters in New Delhi while briefing them on the material shared with Pakistan today.

"All that we want is action and not words from Pakistan. But so far, there is no evidence of it," he said while replying to questions.

"We have given them material that has come up during our investigations. We hope they will investigate this material that leads to Pakistan, share the results with us and extend to us legal assistance so that we can bring the perpetrators to Indian justice," Menon said.

"The assistance from Pakistan extends up to and includes extradition," he said.

Maintaining that the time was not for words but for substance and action, Menon said so far India has 'not seen any action at all' from Pakistan.

"We would like to see real action as soon as possible," he said in reply to a question on a time-frame for a response from Pakistan.

Observing that the investigation into the serial terror attacks in Mumbai were not over, the Foreign Secretary said while the crime was committed in India, the conspiracy was hatched in Pakistan.

"We have requested Pakistan to fulfill her commitments to us," he said.

Maintaining that New Delhi had earlier given evidence to Islamabad [Images] on the deadly attack on Indian Embassy in Kabul, Menon said, "We are hoping that the previous pattern (of not cooperating) is not repeated in this case."

Under international conventions and the SAARC Charter, Pakistan was obliged to extradite the perpetrators of the terror attacks in India, he said.

The material handed over to Pakistan in New Delhi and Islamabad includes the records of interrogation of arrested terrorist Ajmal Kasab [Images], details of the terrorists' communication with elements in Pakistan during the attack, details of the weapons or equipment recovered from the crime scene and details of data recovered from GPS instruments and satellite phones, Menon said.

"It is hard to believe that something of this scale that took so long in preparation and of this nature that amounts to a commando attack could occur without anybody, anywhere in the establishment, knowing this was happening. Wherever the investigation leads, we will follow," the Foreign Secretary said.


Pakistan has to extradite terror suspects: India

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Let me repeat my earlier comments on why extradition is out of the question:

We have no extradition treaty with India - there should be no extradition.

Even if there was an extradition treaty, any evidence showing his guilt should be presented in a court of law, which determines his guilt, and therefore allows his extradition.

 

[Goodperson]

Let me repeat my earlier comments on why extradition is out of the question:

We have no extradition treaty with India - there should be no extradition.

Even if there was an extradition treaty, any evidence showing his guilt should be presented in a court of law, which determines his guilt, and therefore allows his extradition.

Therefore, Article 3 of the 1987 (SAARC) convention says: ‘‘ If a contracting state which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another contracting state with which it has no extradition treaty, the requested state may, at its option, consider this convention as the basis for extradition in respect of the offences set forth in Article 1 as extraditable offences between themselves, subject to the law of the requested state.’’

Should Pak be reminded of the 1987 SAARC convention?- Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Therefore, Article 3 of the 1987 (SAARC) convention says: ‘‘ If a contracting state which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another contracting state with which it has no extradition treaty, the requested state may, at its option, consider this convention as the basis for extradition in respect of the offences set forth in Article 1 as extraditable offences between themselves, subject to the law of the requested state.’’

Should Pak be reminded of the 1987 SAARC convention?- Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times

Therefore, at our option, Pakistan as of now has determined that the convention cannot be the basis of extradition.

And were Pakistan to, at is option, determine that the SAARC convention could be used as the basis for extradition, the need for ensuring that evidence is presented and the guilt of those whose extradition is being sought still needs to be clearly established.

Individuals should not be extradited on someone's say so.

 

[Goodperson]

Therefore, at our option, Pakistan as of now has determined that the convention cannot be the basis of extradition.

And were Pakistan to, at is option, determine that the SAARC convention could be used as the basis for extradition, the need for ensuring that evidence is presented and the guilt of those whose extradition is being sought still needs to be clearly established.

Individuals should not be extradited on someone's say so.

Voila !!! Then what was the need to have convention for extradition ?
The whole matter shows Pakistan is in state of Denial, It calls the perpetrators as stateless actors fully knowing that they do not descend from heaven.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Also, Article IV from the convention supporting Pakistan's stance that any action that needs to be taken against the suspects shoudl be done under Pakistani law:

"A contracting state in whose territory a person suspected of having committed an offence referred to in Article I or agreed to in terms of Article II is found and which has received a request for extradition from another contracting state, shall, if it does not extradite that person, submit the case without exception and without delay to its competent authorities shall take their decisions in the same manner as in the case of any offence of a serious nature under the law of the State."

http://untreaty.un.org/English/Terrorism/Conv18.pdf

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Voila !!! Then what was the need to have convention for extradition ?
The whole matter shows Pakistan is in state of Denial, It calls the perpetrators as stateless actors fully knowing that they do not descend from heaven.

I don't know - ask the people who drafted it. The convention governs existing extradition treaties, and lays out the framework for future treaties, if and when they are signed, but in terms of actually functioning as an extradition treaty itself, it is pretty toothless.

There is no extradition treaty between India and Pakistan, and the SAARC convention only offers an option for extradition under the convention in the absence of a treaty, at the requested country's choice, and if such a decision does not violate the Laws of the requested nation.

In other words, its useless in the Indo-Pak scenario.

And stop ranting your 'in a state of denial'. Some of you have picked up on this phrase that means absolutely nothing in this context, is untrue, and just continue to parrot it as if all other vocabulary has completely escaped you.

 

[Goodperson]

Also, Article IV from the convention supporting Pakistan's stance that any action that needs to be taken against the suspects shoudl be done under Pakistani law:

"A contracting state in whose territory a person suspected of having committed an offence referred to in Article I or agreed to in terms of Article II is found and which has received a request for extradition from another contracting state, shall, if it does not extradite that person, submit the case without exception and without delay to its competent authorities shall take their decisions in the same manner as in the case of any offence of a serious nature under the law of the State."

Any treaty or convention agreement for extradition is done in good faith and is supposed to be interpreted and respected so as to bring to halt inter state terrorists and rogue elements to justice.
What message is Pakistan conveying even before it examined the evidence ? Even death penalty is too less for these people.

 

[Goodperson]

I don't know - ask the people who drafted it. The convention governs existing extradition treaties, and lays out the framework for future treaties, if and when they are signed, but in terms of actually functioning as an extradition treaty itself, it is pretty toothless.

There is not extradition treaty between India and Pakistan, and the SAARC convention only offers an option for extradition under the convention in the absence of a treaty, at the requested country's choice, and if such a decision does not violate the Laws of the requested nation.

In other words, its useless in the Indo-Pak scenario.

And stop ranting your 'in a state of denial'. Some of you have picked up on this phrase that means absolutely nothing in this context, is untrue, and just continue to parrot it as if all other vocabulary has completely escaped you.

Which are the two main countries in SAARC ?
And you say SAARC convention treaty is useless in the Indo-Pak scenario?

This is called "State of Denial". And this is just an instance.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Which are the two main countries in SAARC ?
And you say SAARC convention treaty is useless in the Indo-Pak scenario?

This is called "State of Denial". And this is just an instance.

You have been given the relevant passage from the convention, and they have been explained to you in how the convention makes extradition in the absence of an extradition treaty completely optional and subject to the laws of the nation being requested.

It has also been pointed out to you, using the relevant passages, that the convention clearly states that if a state determines that it will not extradite, than it can try the suspects under her own laws.

Explain to me how my interpretation of what the convention states is wrong.

The only one here who cannot see the facts even when they are hitting you in the face is you, and this 'state of denial' is entirely the domain of the GoI and some Indians.

Wake up and learn to cooperate and not go around warmongering and being belligerent and arrogant and there might actually be some faster progress in the case.

 

[Goodperson]

You have been given the relevant passage from the convention, and they have been explained to you in how the convention makes extradition in the absence of an extradition treaty completely optional and subject to the laws of the nation being requested.

It has also been pointed out to you, using the relevant passages, that the convention clearly states that if a state determines that it will not extradite, than it can try the suspects under her own laws.

Explain to me how my interpretation of what the convention states is wrong.

The only one here who cannot see the facts even when they are hitting you in the face is you, and this 'state of denial' is entirely the domain of the GoI and some Indians.

Wake up and learn to cooperate and not go around warmongering and being belligerent and arrogant and there might actually be some faster progress in the case.

Yes Cooperate that is true but given the trust India - Pak have India had to gather good evidence and share with the aggrieved countries and China and Russia to make sure what the evidence and why Pakistan should act on it.
War mongering was done by Pakistani leaders and Aircraft and armed movement were done by Pakistanis not Indians.
India for that matter is pretty sure that Pakistan will keep on denying (State of Denial) and never act.

World has seen how Musharaf and now Zardari treated your Supreme Court Justice. They have made Joke of it. Can you deny that or still .....

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yes Cooperate that is true but given the trust India - Pak have India had to gather good evidence and share with the aggrieved countries and China and Russia to make sure what the evidence and why Pakistan should act on it.
War mongering was done by Pakistani leaders and Aircraft and armed movement were done by Pakistanis not Indians.
India for that matter is pretty sure that Pakistan will keep on denying (State of Denial) and never act.

World has seen how Musharaf and now Zardari treated your Supreme Court Justice. They have made Joke of it. Can you deny that or still .....

The day India said 'all options were on the table' was when it started warmongering.

Everything Pakistan did from that point on was in response to Indian belligerence and threats.

Since this is the first report that India has shared evidence with Pakistan, the question of 'state of denial does not arise', since Pakistan was completely justified in not accepting anything unless she was presented with evidence.

The denial of rule of law, denial of respect for another nations constitution, denial of common decency and civility, was on display from India's side, in the belligerence, lies and distortions from her media and her government.

Now that India has presented evidence, we shall see. And let me point out that as has been the norm with belligerence and distortions from many Indians, media and government, you chose to talk about 'State of denial' over my simple argument, backed up by the text of the convention, that the SAARC convention does not offer any binding extradition requirement and allows for Pakistani trials and law to be applied.

You didn't like that argument and therefore chose to go into a 'state of denial'.

 

[Goodperson]

The day India said 'all options were on the table' was when it started warmongering.

Everything Pakistan did from that point on was in response to Indian belligerence and threats.

Since this is the first report that India has shared evidence with Pakistan, the question of 'state of denial does not arise', since Pakistan was completely justified in not accepting anything unless she was presented with evidence.

The denial of rule of law, denial of respect for another nations constitution, denial of common decency and civility, was on display from India's side, in the belligerence, lies and distortions from her media and her government.

Now that India has presented evidence, we shall see. And let me point out that as has been the norm with belligerence and distortions from many Indians, media and government, you chose to talk about 'State of denial' over my simple argument, backed up by the text of the convention, that the SAARC convention does not offer any binding extradition requirement and allows for Pakistani trials and law to be applied.

You didn't like that argument and therefore chose to go into a 'state of denial'.

There were reports in Times uk, Pakistan's own Dawn, Geo TV and Nawaz Sharif after few days confirming the same (only to be retracted later due to unknown reasons). JuD was banned by UN Pakistan says its banned but so far India has "not seen any action at all" from Pakistan.

I am not aware of any country supporting Pakistan's stance. I will not argue more but wait for evidences to opens up.

 

[rubyjackass]

Please provide information about any Pakistan's extradition treaty with US.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There were reports in Times uk, Pakistan's own Dawn, Geo TV and Nawaz Sharif after few days confirming the same (only to be retracted later due to unknown reasons). JuD was banned by UN Pakistan says its banned but so far India has "not seen any action at all" from Pakistan.

I am not aware of any country supporting Pakistan's stance. I will not argue more but wait for evidences to opens up.

Reports of what? A newspaper report is not evidence of anything. Nawaz Sharif never said that India should not share evidence, or tha Pakistan shoudl cooperate without evidence and extradite anyone.

India and Indians are in a 'state of denial' on the action Pakistan has taken. The alleged masterminds and some other's have been arrested, and multiple news organizations have verified that most of JuD's complexes have been taken over.

There have been multiple interviews with the remaining leaders of JuD who have stated that they are finding it extremely hard to operate. There was a ToI link to that effect just a few days ago.

India and Indians continue to repeat the same old line despite all teh facts staring them in the face.

No country has asked Pakistan to extradite or do anything without evidence - they have all encouraged her to act against the alleged perpetrators on the basis of evidence - that is Pakistan's stance, so I actually see almost every single country supporting Pakistan's stance.