5 ms·

And yet, Edward Snowden still sits outside of US prison. Obviously the extradition treaties have limits.

ABeeSea 4y ago
Snowden’s charges had a maximum of 10 years. If he had surrendered and pled, he would be free in America soon. Instead he gets to spend the rest of his life in Russia. That was his choice.
- feintruled 4y ago
  He could have been free - or he could have suffered a 'mishap' in prison. Not that things have ultimately worked out well for him, but I'd understood Russia was merely a stop-over from which he realised there wasn't going to ever be a safe onward option, so he's stuck.
- caoilte 4y ago
  Each year in prison shortens your life expectancy by two years. So he'd be out soon, but very very unhealthy. Better to be in Russia. It's not the worst.
kemayo 4y ago
Yes, the fairly obvious limit of going somewhere the US doesn't have an extradition treaty with. In Snowden's case: Russia. Which I personally wouldn't be thrilled to do, but the options are limited. Here's the countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradition_treaties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradit... It's not hard, in theory, but it does rather limit your movements going forward.
- throwaway48375 4y ago
  There are a good number of grey countries on that map I suspect they would just rendition you from.
- Scoundreller 4y ago
  Lots of misrepresentation going on here. An extradition treaty merely facilitates things. You can have protections despite a treaty (e.g. France for its own citizens, ever!) and you could still be extradited if there isn’t one (there just isn’t an agreed upon mechanism for how to do it).
  - kergonath 4y ago
    Before someone assumes this is a dirty European protectionist trick, the US do not extradite their citizens either.
    - boeingUH60 4y ago
      No, they (rarely) do Here’s a recent example - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56248558 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56248558
      - kergonath 4y ago
        You’re right, every treaty is a different beast and there are no absolutes. But the general principle is Further, 18 U.S.C. 3181 and 3184 permit the United States to extradite, without regard to the existence of a treaty, persons (other than citizens, nationals or permanent residents of the United States), who have committed crimes of violence against nationals of the United States in foreign countries. https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-15000-international-extradition-and-related-matters#9-15.100 https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-15000-international-extradit... If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been requested by that country if the other requirements of that treaty or convention are met. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3196 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3196
        Scoundreller 4y ago
        Those seem to be the mechanisms to extradite in the absence of a treaty. No point in having laws about treaties because ratified treaties trump the law (is my understanding).
- sgt101 4y ago
  Go to Russia and have a use for the authorities there, or have a lever/debt of gratitude. I genuinely don't know where Snowden sits on that - I think he serves as a useful demonstration of the power of Russia and the failings of the US, but obviously know nothing. On the other hand, a failed crypto bro who has taken oligarch money and can't repay it with interest. I think that is going to be the very definition of a "Russian Holiday".

Snowden’s charges had a maximum of 10 years. If he had surrendered and pled, he would be free in America soon. Instead he gets to spend the rest of his life in Russia. That was his choice.

feintruled 4y ago
He could have been free - or he could have suffered a 'mishap' in prison. Not that things have ultimately worked out well for him, but I'd understood Russia was merely a stop-over from which he realised there wasn't going to ever be a safe onward option, so he's stuck.
caoilte 4y ago
Each year in prison shortens your life expectancy by two years. So he'd be out soon, but very very unhealthy. Better to be in Russia. It's not the worst.

kemayo 4y ago

Yes, the fairly obvious limit of going somewhere the US doesn't have an extradition treaty with. In Snowden's case: Russia. Which I personally wouldn't be thrilled to do, but the options are limited. Here's the countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradition_treaties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradit... It's not hard, in theory, but it does rather limit your movements going forward.

throwaway48375 4y ago
There are a good number of grey countries on that map I suspect they would just rendition you from.
Scoundreller 4y ago
Lots of misrepresentation going on here. An extradition treaty merely facilitates things. You can have protections despite a treaty (e.g. France for its own citizens, ever!) and you could still be extradited if there isn’t one (there just isn’t an agreed upon mechanism for how to do it).
- kergonath 4y ago
  Before someone assumes this is a dirty European protectionist trick, the US do not extradite their citizens either.
  - boeingUH60 4y ago
    No, they (rarely) do Here’s a recent example - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56248558 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56248558
    - kergonath 4y ago
      You’re right, every treaty is a different beast and there are no absolutes. But the general principle is Further, 18 U.S.C. 3181 and 3184 permit the United States to extradite, without regard to the existence of a treaty, persons (other than citizens, nationals or permanent residents of the United States), who have committed crimes of violence against nationals of the United States in foreign countries. https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-15000-international-extradition-and-related-matters#9-15.100 https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-15000-international-extradit... If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been requested by that country if the other requirements of that treaty or convention are met. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3196 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3196
      - Scoundreller 4y ago
        Those seem to be the mechanisms to extradite in the absence of a treaty. No point in having laws about treaties because ratified treaties trump the law (is my understanding).
sgt101 4y ago
Go to Russia and have a use for the authorities there, or have a lever/debt of gratitude. I genuinely don't know where Snowden sits on that - I think he serves as a useful demonstration of the power of Russia and the failings of the US, but obviously know nothing. On the other hand, a failed crypto bro who has taken oligarch money and can't repay it with interest. I think that is going to be the very definition of a "Russian Holiday".