Double criminality

Last updated

Double criminality, or dual criminality, is a requirement in the extradition law and international prisoner transfers of many countries. It states that a suspect can be extradited from one country to stand trial for breaking a second country's law only if a similar law exists in the extraditing country, and that any crime in any sentencing country must also be a crime in any other country to receive any internationally transferred prisoners.

Contents

If Country A has no laws against blasphemy, for example, a lack of double criminality could prevent a suspect from being extradited from Country A to face blasphemy charges in another country, i.e. no outbound extradition from Country A, and neither are citizens of Country A eligible for international prisoner transfers from another country having criminally convicted them for blasphemy, i.e. no inbound prisoner transfer to Country A.

European Union

In accordance with Article 2(2) of the European Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, the offences listed in that provision allow each EU member state to request a suspect (called a 'requested person') their 'surrender between judicial authorities' (the EU term that replaced extradition) pursuant to a European arrest warrant, without verification of the double criminality of the act.

The only condition is that the offences they are suspected of ‘are punishable in the issuing Member State by a [sentence of] at least three years and as they are defined by the law of the issuing Member State’. [1]

The list, which includes 32 categories of offences, was subject of a court case before the European Court of Justice. The plaintiffs (a lawyers' organization) alleged that because it includes 'vague and imprecise' wording, such as "computer-related crime", "racism and xenophobia" or "counterfeiting and piracy of products" it breached or was at least capable of breaching the principle of legality in criminal matters.

The court, however, dismissed the legality objections on the ground that the precise definition, of those offences and their penalty, was a matter for the national law of each of the (at the time 27) issuing Member States and therefore the legality principle was not a concern for the European Council.

It ruled that the abolition of the double criminality requirement was justified on the grounds of:

  1. the principle of mutual recognition,
  2. in the light of the "high degree of trust and solidarity between the Member States", and
  3. (inherently or simply because the 3+ years of punishment in the law) the categories of offences are of a seriousness which may affect public order and public safety and justifies dispensing with the verification of double criminality. [2]

Hong Kong

See Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019.

A proposed Hong Kong extradition ordinance tabled in April 2019, which would ease extradition to the Mainland, includes 37 types of crimes. While the Government maintains that the proposal contains protections of the dual criminality requirement, its opponents allege that after people are surrendered to the Mainland authorities, it can charge them with some other crime and impose the death penalty for that other crime. [3] There are also concerns about the retroactive effect of the new law. [4]

The government's proposal was later amended to remove the categories after complaints from the business sector, such as "the unlawful use of computers". [4]

Experts have noted that the legal systems of mainland China and Hong Kong follow 'different protocols' with regard to the important conditions of double criminality and non-refoulement, as well as on the matter of executive vs. judicial oversight on any extradition request. [5]

United States

Double criminality is a requirement in extradition procedures [6] and international prisoner transfers [7] to and from the United States, as extradition and prisoner transfer are allowed only for offenses that are alleged as crimes in both jurisdictions.

Related Research Articles

Universal jurisdiction is a legal principle that allows states or international organizations to claim criminal jurisdiction over an accused person regardless of where the alleged crime was committed, and regardless of the accused's nationality, country of residence, or any other relation to the prosecuting entity. Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are considered crimes against all, too serious to tolerate jurisdictional arbitrage. The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore closely linked to the idea that some international norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community, as well as to the concept of jus cogens – that certain international law obligations are binding on all states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">One country, two systems</span> Constitutional principle of the Peoples Republic of China

"One country, two systems" is a constitutional principle of the People's Republic of China (PRC) describing the governance of the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hong Kong Basic Law</span> Organic law of the Hong Kong SAR

The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China is a national law of China that serves as the organic law for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Comprising nine chapters, 160 articles and three annexes, the Basic Law was composed to implement Annex I of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Extradition</span> Transfer of a suspect from one jurisdiction to another by law enforcement

In an extradition, one jurisdiction delivers a person accused or convicted of committing a crime in another jurisdiction, over to the other's law enforcement. It is a cooperative law enforcement procedure between the two jurisdictions and depends on the arrangements made between them. In addition to legal aspects of the process, extradition also involves the physical transfer of custody of the person being extradited to the legal authority of the requesting jurisdiction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sedition</span> Incitement of rebellion

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech or organization, that tends toward rebellion against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent toward, or insurrection against, established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition.

The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is an arrest warrant valid throughout all member states of the European Union (EU). Once issued, it requires another member state to arrest and transfer a criminal suspect or sentenced person to the issuing state so that the person can be put on trial or complete a detention period. It is a simplified cross-border judicial surrender method, and has replaced the lengthy extradition procedures that used to exist between member states. The EAW has been in force since 1 January 2004 in all Member States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights in Hong Kong</span> Rights enjoyed by citizens in China

Human rights protection is enshrined in the Basic Law and its Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap.383). By virtue of the Bill of Rights Ordinance and Basic Law Article 39, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is put into effect in Hong Kong. Any local legislation that is inconsistent with the Basic Law can be set aside by the courts. This does not apply to national legislation that applies to Hong Kong, such as the National Security Law, even if it is inconsistent with the Bills of Rights Ordinance, ICCPR, or the Basic Law.

Extradition law in Australia permits the formal process by which a fugitive found outside a jurisdiction is surrendered to the jurisdiction where an alleged offence has taken place for trial or punishment. This may include a process done within the country or one between Australia and another country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zhou Yongjun incident</span>

The Zhou Yongjun incident was a political controversy which involved the rendition of Zhou Yongjun (周勇军), a former student activist during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre, by the Hong Kong authorities to the People's Republic of China. Zhou attempted to enter Hong Kong from the United States via Macau using a forged Malaysian passport. Zhou's supporters alleged the renditioning to be illegal, and his lawyer, Democratic Party chairman Albert Ho, described Zhou's case as "posing the biggest challenge to the one country, two systems principle laid down in the Basic Law." The Government of Hong Kong refused to comment on individual cases, and the People's Republic of China said Zhou was detained on several charges, including one of financial fraud.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in Macau</span>

Capital punishment in Macau was formally abolished in 1976 and reiterated in the Penal Code of Macau in the 1995.

A political offence exception is a provision which limits the obligation of a sovereign state under an extradition or mutual legal assistance treaty or statute. Such provisos allow the state whose assistance has been requested to refuse to hand over a suspect to – or to gather evidence on behalf of – another state, if the requested party's competent authority determines that the requesting party seeks assistance in order to prosecute an offence of a political character.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lam government</span> Former administration of Hong Kong

The administration of Carrie Lam as Chief Executive of Hong Kong, or Lam administration, officially referred to as "The 5th term Chief Executive of Hong Kong" relates to the period of governance of Hong Kong headed by Chief Executive Carrie Lam, between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill 2003</span>

National Security Bill 2003 was a proposed bill which aimed to amend the Crimes Ordinance, the Official Secrets Ordinance and the Societies Ordinance pursuant to the obligation imposed by Article 23 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and to provide for related, incidental and consequential amendments. The proposed bill caused considerable controversy in Hong Kong and a massive demonstration on 1 July 2003. In the aftermath, James Tien resigned from the Executive Council and the bill was withdrawn after it became clear that it would not get the necessary support from the Legislative Council for it to be passed. The bill was then shelved indefinitely.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2019 Hong Kong extradition bill</span> 2019 bill proposed by Hong Kongs government

The Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 was a proposed bill regarding extradition to amend the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance in relation to special surrender arrangements and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Ordinance so that arrangements for mutual legal assistance can be made between Hong Kong and any place outside Hong Kong. The bill was proposed by the Hong Kong government in February 2019 to establish a mechanism for transfers of fugitives not only for Taiwan, but also for Mainland China and Macau, which are currently excluded in the existing laws.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Poon Hiu-wing</span> 2018 murder in Taipei, Taiwan

Amber Poon Hiu-wing, a 20-year-old pregnant woman from Hong Kong, was murdered in Taipei on 17 February 2018 whilst on vacation with her boyfriend Chan Tong-kai, aged 19 at the time and from Shenzhen. Chan admitted to Hong Kong authorities that he killed his girlfriend in a hotel room in Taipei, stole her belongings, left her body in the bushes, and flew back to Hong Kong. As the murder happened in Taiwan where they had no jurisdiction, the authorities in Hong Kong could not charge Chan with murder, and could only sentence him on money laundering charges resulting from the killing. Chan could not be extradited to Taiwan either since there is no extradition treaty between Hong Kong and Taiwan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hong Kong national security law</span> Chinese legislation on national security in Hong Kong

The Hong Kong national security law, officially the Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, is a piece of national security legislation concerning Hong Kong, enacted under the National People's Congress decision on Hong Kong national security legislation. It was passed on 30 June 2020 by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress as a means of resolving the anti-extradition bill protests instigated by a bill proposed in 2019 to enable extradition to other territories including the mainland, and came into force the same day.

<i>Case 3/2008 in Macau</i> Habeas corpus case

Case 3/2008 in Macau was a habeas corpus case heard before the Macau Tribunal of Ultimate Instance. The applicant A filed a request of habeas corpus to the court, as he believed his elder sister B was in unlawful detention by the Judiciary Police in Macau, when in fact B had been transferred to the Public Security Bureau of Zhuhai, China, one day before the request. The court has no jurisdiction outside Macau, so it ruled that there was no further need to adjudicate, on grounds of supervening impossibility of the remedy sought. The judgment, however, went on to cite a previous decision by the same court in 2007, which allowed a similar application. The court this time reiterated that before specific legislation is introduced, it is illegal to transfer fugitives to mainland China, and the acts by the authority in the present case "discredit justice, undermine the Rechtsstaat and do not bring prestige to the Macau Special Administrative Region." The case has since been cited by jurists in academic papers concerning the lack of extradition legislation between Macau and mainland China.

<i>HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying</i> 2021 appeal in Hong Kong

HKSAR v. Lai Chee Ying was an appeal involving points of law by the Department of Justice over the decision of the Court of First Instance (CFI) to grant bail to the founder of Apple Daily Jimmy Lai. The Court of Final Appeal (CFA) reversed the CFI's interpretation of art.42(2) of the Hong Kong national security law.

The principle of legality in French criminal law holds that no one may be convicted of a criminal offense unless a previously published legal text sets out in clear and precise wording out the constituent elements of the offense and the penalty which applies to it. (Latin:Nullum crimen, nulla pœna sine lege, in other words, "no crime, no penalty, without a law").

References

  1. "European E-Justice Portal: European Arrest Warrant".
  2. "Judgment CJEU 3 May 2007, C-303/05 (Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW / Leden van de Ministerraad (Belgium))".
  3. Cheng, Kris (2019-03-26). "Hong Kong scraps 9 types of commercial crimes from China extradition plan amid pressure from business sector". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 2019-06-15.
  4. 1 2 Mak, Elise (2019-04-23). "HK effort to ease extradition law concerns fall short; many rendition routes to China remain". Harbour Times. Retrieved 2019-06-15.
  5. "University of Warwick (UK): The proposed Hong Kong-China extradition bill - expert comment". warwick.ac.uk. Retrieved 2019-06-15.
  6. "The Consular Role in International Extradition". Foreign Affairs Manual . April 30, 2018. Retrieved 2020-08-01.
  7. "International Prisoner Transfer Program". Foreign Affairs Manual . April 30, 2018. Retrieved 2020-08-01.