NCJ Number
109676
Journal
New York University Law Review Volume: 61 Issue: 4 Dated: (October 1986) Pages: 654-702
Date Published
1986
Length
49 pages
Annotation
This paper analyzes the political offense exception (POE) to extradition and the problems it causes when applied to terrorists, evaluates proposed methods of reform, and argues that the most promising approach to the problem is abolishing the exception.
Abstract
After examining the original purposes of the POE, the author describes major flaws in the doctrine and procedural aspects of the extradition process. These discussions demonstrate the difficulty of attempting to draw persuasive distinctions between political offenses and common crimes, and among different political organizations. Five recent cases involving alleged terrorist activity illustrate these problems. Three reforms are examined: narrowing the definition of a political offense through legislation, eliminating the POE from bilateral extradition treaties with certain states, and establishing terrorism as an international crime through a multilateral convention. If the POE is abolished, the paper contends that alternative means -- the double criminality principle, the specialty doctrine, and the discrimination clause -- will protect a requested person who might otherwise be persecuted for political activism or denied due process of law by the requesting state. 284 footnotes.