4 ms·
This does not look like correct analysis - the extradition treaty between the US and Canada[1] states: Article 1 Each Contracting Party agrees to extradite to
by Bahamut 6y ago
This does not look like correct analysis - the extradition treaty between the US and Canada[1] states:
Article 1
Each Contracting Party agrees to extradite to the other, in the circumstances and subject to the conditions described in this Treaty, persons found in its territory who have been charged with, or convicted of, any of the offenses covered by Article 2 of this Treaty committed within the territory of the other, or outside thereof under the conditions specified in Article 3(3) of this Treaty.
Article 3(3) states
When the offense for which extradition has been requested has been committed outside the territory of the requesting State, the executive or other appropriate authority of the requested State shall have the power to grant the extradition if the laws of the requested State provide for jurisdiction over such an offense committed in similar circumstances.
[1] http://www.mcnabbassociates.com/Canada%20International%20Extradition%20Treaty%20with%20the%20United%20States.pdf http://www.mcnabbassociates.com/Canada%20International%20Ext...
- billfruit 6y agoWhat exactly is Canada's locus standi on this? Is anyone sanctioned/wanted by US liable to be arrested if they land in Canada? On what charges was the Canadian warrant issued to arrest Meng?
- nucleardog 6y agoCanada will only extradite for things that would be considered criminal in Canada, and only in cases where the requesting party can provide enough evidence that it could be brought to trial in Canada as well. They also will also consider every decision in the face of Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which provides for a fundamental right to justice and security. If the extradition, or actions post-extradition, would likely violate the person’s rights then they will not be extradited. (So, e.g., will not extradite someone to face the death penalty.) There’s a general overview of the process, checkpoints, appeals, etc here: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/extradition.html https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/extradition.htm... Meng is being charged with fraud for lying to HSBC. It was a point of contention since the representations she made would not have been criminal in Canada (no sanctions). However the actual act of making fraudulent misrepresentations is the crime, and it's criminal in Canada as well. There's some information and a link to the actual court ruling here: https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/with-the-meng-wanzhou-decision-politicized-process-lives-only-in-chinas-imagination/ https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/with-the-meng-wanzhou-de...
- billfruit 6y agoYes, but how was her initial detainment by Canada justified? So in effect does it imply that anyone wanted by US can be detained by Canada, and Canada needs to establish legality of it only after the fact?
- nucleardog 6y agoIt was justified as any arrest is -- people are generally arrested and then taken to court to have their outcome determined, not the other way around. Your question phrased another way: > "Does it imply that anyone wanted by the government can be detained by the police and the government needs to establish the legality of it only after the fact?" Yes, very much so. I suspect if the US were randomly and wantonly requesting illegal extraditions to harass people located in Canada that Canada would simply stop making provisional arrests pending formal requests for extradition and require the paperwork up front.
- mthoms 6y agoNo. The US has to present evidence to a Canadian judge first. Just like any other arrest warrant.