NationStates Jolt Archive

Greeting member nations distinguished leaders and honored friends,

I come before you asking for your support in my proposal for the extradition of felons from member nations back to the country where the crime occurred so they can stand trial.

Recently in ARFVILLE a terrible incident occurred where a family including several young children where brutally murdered. The suspect has been identified through the dedicated work of our law enforcement agencies and the subject has been located.

This seems like it should be the end of it the suspect should be tried and if convicted punished, however the subject has fled our nation and is living in a foreign country that is not willing to extradite.

We ask that all UN nations agree to extradite prisoners to other UN nations when a valid extradition request is submitted having been issued by a judge following judicial review and supported by probable cause affidavits.

I appreciate your support in this legislation.

Our Imperial Security task force has kept a long-standing tradition of allowing the exportation of criminals and deviants to their respective nations. As one former Commandant in the ISTF once said, "Hey, let those heretics be their problem." This is a motto which the Empire has long stood by, albeit we cannot guarantee the safety or well-being of any international criminal on Imperial soil while he is not in Imperial custody.

Could you please post the text of your proposal here? Also, how well does this fit in with Right to Refuse Extradition (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9052878&postcount=104)?

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

The Popotan might consider this. We would prefer to export our detractors rather than execute them if they come from outside.

We were unaware of the the Right to Refuse Extradition somehow our lawyers missed it when they were reviewing current policies. :headbang: We will be reposting this as a repeal request.

Repeal "Right to Refuse Extradition"

A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal


Resolution: #103


Proposed by: ARFVILLE

Description: UN Resolution #103: Right to Refuse Extradition (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Noting that major crimes (felonies) effect the moral fabric of all nations.

Further Noting that Criminals are aware of the punishments including capital punishment when they choose to commit a crime.

Seeing that criminals are actively fleeing from the nations where they commit the crimes into sanctuary nations where they know they will not be extradited.

It is hereby resolved that UN member nations will extradite wanted felons once a valid extradition request is submitted which has been signed by a judge and has been issued under probable cause supported by sworn affidavit.

It is hereby further resolved that UN member nations failing to extradite wanted felons following the receipt of a valid extradition request may be subject to censure or ejection from the United Nations as deemed appropriate by the UN delegates.

It is acknowledged that no individual nation may utilize military force to enforce an extradition request without bringing the situation to the United Nations and attempting to bring forth a diplomatic solution.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 105 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Wed Mar 19 2008

A small point of drafting, which we would have offered before submission had the author given this body sight of his proposal in advance:

Noting that major crimes (felonies) affect the moral fabric of all nations.

As it stands, the repeal argument is stating that major crimes create the moral fabric of all nations, rather than merely altering such.

Rather more seriously, this repeal is illegal. It attempts to introduce new legislation (including some that is itself illegal), which is not permitted under UN law. All that a repeal can do is strike a single existing resolution from the books. It may not do anything else. Any new law on the subject must come in the form of a separately crafted resolution.

In any case, we would strenuously oppose the repeal of "Right to Refuse Extradition". There are many nations whose judicial and sentencing procedures and policies we are mistrustful of, and to whom we would regard the extradition of an individual as a potentially unjust act. Capital punishment is an extreme example of this; we oppose the death penalty, and to be required to become complicit in murder as the author seems to wish would raise questions we are sure he would find undesirable about the legitimacy of using force to resist such immorality.

A small point of drafting, which we would have offered before submission had the author given this body sight of his proposal in advance:



As it stands, the repeal argument is stating that major crimes create the moral fabric of all nations, rather than merely altering such.

Rather more seriously, this repeal is illegal. It attempts to introduce new legislation (including some that is itself illegal), which is not permitted under UN law. All that a repeal can do is strike a single existing resolution from the books. It may not do anything else. Any new law on the subject must come in the form of a separately crafted resolution.

In any case, we would strenuously oppose the repeal of "Right to Refuse Extradition". There are many nations whose judicial and sentencing procedures and policies we are mistrustful of, and to whom we would regard the extradition of an individual as a potentially unjust act. Capital punishment is an extreme example of this; we oppose the death penalty, and to be required to become complicit in murder as the author seems to wish would raise questions we are sure he would find undesirable about the legitimacy of using force to resist such immorality.

Not to mention the general problem of the variance of what constitutes a felony... Since "felony" is by no means an international standard.... I, for example, would refuse extradiction for a person who is facing felony charges for having had possession of 10 grams of pot....

Roshavia does not support such a resolution in order to ensure her citizens are protected by her own laws. If a Roshavian citizen commits a crime in Policewilliobeateu, for example, the Roshavian government would not willingly allow one of its citizens be subjected to the barbaric, brutal "justice" system which is Policewilliobeateu.

We ask that all UN nations agree to extradite prisoners to other UN nations when a valid extradition request is submitted having been issued by a judge following judicial review and supported by probable cause affidavits.


I cannot support your proposal.

Recently a citizen of Blog Waters was traveling abroad when he proceeded to light a tobacco cigarette outdoors in a public park, totally unaware that this was a felony punishable by an indefinite prison sentence in this other nation. He fled and we will harbor him indefinitely.

This example illustrates why Blog Waters cannot agree with any mandatory extradition policies. This would subject our nation to the laws other nations. Furthermore, your proposal would not even solve the problem addressed - criminals would simply flee to non-UN nations.

Far be it from us to take a law-and-order stance, but it certainly seems a wide variety of nations need to do more to ensure their nationals are aware of the various legal codes of the nations in which they tourist.

Attached to the right to refuse extradition is the balancing responsibility to craft fair extradition treaties with nations that hose (erm host) one's nationals.

Leetha Talone
UN Ambassador, Rubina
Regional Delegate, User Friendlia