The Pros And Cons Of Extradition

The death penalty is procedure conducted by the government by which a person is put to death as a punishment for a crime. The crimes that can sometimes carry the death sentence in places like the US are war crimes, treason, murder, crimes against humanity, espionage and genocide. 103 countries as of today have fully removed the death penalty except for special crimes e.g. War crimes. Although this is a step in the right direction (for most people) 56 countries are known to perform the death penalty.

They should be sought out and punished for crimes against humanity. There also should be an international coalition brought together to observe every execution to make sure nations abide by rules and regulations set forth by the international community. A total 139 countries has abolished the death penalty around the world (Sangiorgio, 2011). Support and the demand for the end of the death penalty are growing stronger every day and this article shows that the death penalty isn’t as popular as it used to be among people.

At Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, a group of expert defense attorneys who represented an accused terrorist facing the death penalty quit the case due to the intrusive monitoring of their client. Their defendant, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, is allegedly responsible for the bombing of the US destroyer Cole back in 2000. The man who is now defending him is 35 year old Navy Lieutenant Alaric Piette, who quit his job as a SEAL to become a lawyer. However, the problem arises due to the fact that he graduated from Georgetown University in 2012, leaving him with only six years of experience, along with never having participated in a capital case such as this one. Because of this, many people, including himself, believe that Lieutenant Piette is not qualified to take on a case of this magnitude (Philipps,

The death penalty is a major barrier to negotiating an extradition treaty with a nation that does not support it. There are instances when other countries have refused extradition even when US has an extradition treaty with them (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org). Clearly, it is detrimental for the US to continue to use the death penalty.

America’s bloodiest war fought was on its own soil, and it is known as the Civil War. The road to the Civil War will begin in 1798 with the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. The Resolutions were drafted as an opposition of the Alien and Sedition Acts signed in by President Adams. These Acts were passed due to a foreseen war with France. The Naturalization Act made it more difficult for an immigrant to become a citizen of the United States by increasing the amount of time it takes to complete citizenship from five years to fourteen years. The Sedition Act forbid public opposition towards the government, which goes against the first amendment in the constitution which states that “Congress shall not prohibit freedom of speech and of the press.” The Alien and Sedition Acts were passed through Congress in 1798 which prompted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions published by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. According to Britannica the Kentucky Resolutions written by Thomas Jefferson declared that the national government did not hold supreme authority and that states would get to decide what is passed within the state and were voted to be invalid while the Virginia Resolutions published by James Madison proclaimed the acts to be unconstitutional because the states have supreme authority over what is occurring in the state.

“…Associate justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said: “I have yet to see a death case…in which the defendant was well-represented at trial” (Shipp). The same if they have money goes if the prisoner has information for the government, or is a member of the mob. If the murderer was smart enough to travel to a country that opposes capital punishment, the government would most likely reduce that person’s sentence to life without the possibility of parole to bring them back to the United States (Shipp).

Unlike some countries such as china, we are innocent until proven guilty by a jury and judge. Which give a huge advantage to both sides being that you can prove your case to the people and have them decide who's at fault and who “wins” the case. It puts a heavy load on the accusers to show evidence of their actuations. It also makes them prove that the allegations were in fact true or

The Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) is a congressionally approved interstate compact among 48 states, the District of Columbia, and United States which provides for the temporary transfer of prisoners who are wanted by other states for trial on criminal charges. Ohio adopted this federal law in 1969, and codified its provisions in O.R.C. 2963.30. The IAD only applies to those jurisdictions which have adopted it , and the United State Supreme Court held in United State v. Mauro , that IAD provisions apply only after a detainer has been lodged against a prisoner with the records personnel of the institution where he is incarcerated. This position has been consistently upheld in Ohio. The 10th District Ohio Court of Appeals cited Mauro

For centuries the debate over how far our first amendment extends has reoccurred and been ever present in the court system. The Alien and Sedition acts was the first time it became noticeable that there were limits attached to our speech. They can be traced back as the beginning of this issue, since the dilemma of what exactly “freedom of speech” means began being argued. Multiple different scenarios were brought forth to the legal system in order to determine whether punishment was due or the act was excusable, simply because of the fact that our government was slacking in establishing a set-in stone meaning behind the first amendment.

When this occurs, the judge orders a bench warrant, this is simply an arrest warrant. If the defendant communicates with the court within a stipulated time, he can ask the court to set a new trial date.

The United Nations and other experts have made an educated guess the complete market price value of unlawful human trafficking competes with both drug and firearms trafficking. The crime of human trafficking is intercontinental and is established everywhere, as well as the United States. The term “trafficking” is misrepresented in that it is frequently presumed to imply movement across multi-national borders.

American Prisons poorly represent our criminal justice system; due to not have clearly outlined goals associated for its offenders. Also, look at the cost to lock up and house this country’s offenders, it has increased significantly over the past few decades. With the two above stated issues, we have a huge problem in America. Other countries look at our justice system as though we have got it figured out and, we may have a better idea of Justice than most countries, because, well we are no longer chopping off hands for stealing anymore. While there are some prisons that are too harsh, there are some that make life way too easy. Therefore, we must create a baseline for all prisons in this country. In order to decrease the percentages of repeat offenders and expedite the out-processing of small time criminals, American prisons are in dire need of help, especially

When making a trade, one typically gives away something with the hope and assurance that what they are receiving has equal or greater value to what they are exchanging. Whether this be two children trading Pokemon cards or mafia bosses and their drug deals, a trade is generally accepted as the exchange of goods with close to equivalent value. However, with the emergence of a Canadian government initiative to seek an extradition treaty with China, these fundamental principles of trade are not being met. Extradition is defined as the “procedure by which a state or nation, upon receipt of a formal request by another state or nation, turns over to that second jurisdiction an individual charged with or convicted of a crime in that jurisdiction”. With this in mind, establishing an extradition treaty with China would involve people

Over the course of time, capital punishment has been one of the most controversial issues all over the world. According to Amnesty International, 141 countries have already abolished the capital punishment in their system. A total of 56 countries worldwide have the death sentence in law and in practice, ranking the Middle East and North Africa for

Though there are many countries that are apart of the ICC, a fair question is what sparked the need for such a powerful court? Because even though the ICC is doing their best not to repeat the mistake of have crimes go unpunished there are situation such as the United States refusing to join the organization and has immunity from being prosecuted that makes the court look unfair and re enforces the idea that that the powerful are untouchable. Another case would be that the ICC has been heavily criticized for being prone to prosecute cases only in Africa, which raises the question why do they prosecute countries that are not wealthy and ignore the corruption in wealthy countries. These small questions can make one consider if there really is a need for an international criminal court. However what one fails to understand is there is a need for an international court. In this paper I will be discussing exactly what was the cause of such a powerful court, why the United State has continuously refuse to join the ICC and had immunity before official leaving and finally why does it seem like the ICC is prosecuting countries that are not wealthy such as countries in Africa and ignore the corruption in wealthy countries.