To top it off Japan extradited US citizens for doing something not considered a crime in Japan! In what world does that happen?
Edit: Why the downvotes?
“If requested by the charging state, US states and territories must extradite anyone charged with a felony, misdemeanor, or even petty offense in another US state or territory, even if the offense is not a crime in the custodial state.”
As far as I’m aware this holds true of international extradition too. That’s kinda the whole point—you can’t escape justice by picking a destination that doesn’t prosecute your crime.
>> That’s kinda the whole point—you can’t escape justice by picking a destination that doesn’t prosecute your crime.
You most certain can; combine poor relations with the country requesting extradition and you can avoid "justice" indefinitely.
Dual criminality is a standard provision in most (nearly all? all?) extradition treaties. Canada's treaty with the USA for example says:
> Persons shall be delivered up according to the provisions of this Treaty for any of the offenses listed in the Schedule annexed to this Treaty, which is an integral part of this Treaty, provided these offenses are punishable by the laws of both Contracting Parties by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year.
and the US-Japan treaty says:
> Extradition shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty for any offense listed in the Schedule annexed to this Treaty, which forms an integral part of this Treaty, when such an offense is punishable by the laws of both Contracting Parties by death, by life imprisonment, or by deprivation of liberty for a period of more than one year [...]
I upvoted it.
No, they do it because of the more specific Extradition Clause, not the Full Faith and Credit clause.
I wasn’t purposefully making the comparison but rather attempting to demonstrate that extradition is meant to follow the laws of the place where the crime took place rather than the place where the fugitive resides.
Unlike the US domestic situation, sovereign states are necessarily allowed some leeway in choosing which requests to honor. However it was my understanding that it is generally not a requirement that the alleged crime be illegal on both jurisdictions. Thank you for providing evidence to the contrary.
Generally, no, its not.
> As far as I’m aware this holds true of international extradition too.
It is not, it is a feature of US domestic law from the extradition clause of the US Constitution, which reflects the much closer association of US states than foreign nations.
Dual criminality is the normal standard in extradition treaties (including the US-Japan one), though nothing (except perhaps individual rights under local law) prevents a state from extraditing persons when not required by a treaty, or deporting foreigners back to their country of nationality with similar effect.