4 ms·
Most laws apply to people within the territory of a country, not to citizens of that country wherever they may be, and extradition typically is used when the la
by hansvm 5y ago
Most laws apply to people within the territory of a country, not to citizens of that country wherever they may be, and extradition typically is used when the law was broken in some country and the offender fled, not when the offense was committed elsewhere. For what it's worth, I think the counter-examples are a worrying trend.
Is there a good reason why any country willing to claim you as a citizen should have a right to police you wherever you are in the world? In context, if Russia decided that all current Ukrainians were Russian citizens should they be allowed to continue the invasion (which at that point would just be ordinary police work quelling an internal rebellion)?
- shuntress 5y agoI think the key factor here is individual consent. Russia cannot just declare that every person is a Russian citizen and therefor subject to Russian laws. (I mean... they can but it would obviously be in bad faith) But it does make sense that people who themselves claim and hold Russian citizenship be subject to Russian laws and that if they do not wish to be so, they renounce their citizenship.
- hansvm 5y agoOne might hope that consent would be the defining feature, but that's not how citizenship currently works. People become accidental citizens all the time, and the process for undoing the harm that causes is often lengthy and expensive.