- 06-Nov-2025
- public international law
In extradition law, certain offences are categorized as non-extraditable due to legal, political, or human rights concerns. However, the status of such offences is not always fixed. Over time, through legal reforms, changes in treaties, or evolving diplomatic relations, offences that were once considered non-extraditable can become extraditable. This flexibility ensures that legal systems can adapt to modern forms of crime and growing international cooperation in criminal justice.
Countries may revise or update extradition treaties to expand the list of extraditable offences. For example, cybercrimes or terrorism-related acts—once not included—are now commonly added to treaties.
A country may amend its own extradition laws to redefine what constitutes an extraditable offence, especially if national security or public interest is involved.
Even without formal treaty amendments, two countries can mutually agree to extradite individuals for specific offences under diplomatic arrangements or supplementary agreements.
Some offences, like certain economic crimes or political acts, may be reclassified in light of global consensus. For instance, corruption or money laundering may no longer be protected under political offence exceptions.
International conventions (e.g., UN Conventions Against Transnational Organized Crime, Corruption, or Terrorism) encourage signatories to treat specified crimes as extraditable.
If both the requesting and requested countries recognize an offence as a crime, it strengthens the possibility of extradition—even if the crime wasn’t originally included in an older treaty.
Generally, extradition is not applied retroactively unless both countries agree. The offence must have been extraditable at the time it was committed—unless explicitly allowed.
Even if an offence becomes extraditable, extradition may still be denied if there's a risk of torture, unfair trial, or persecution in the requesting country.
Indian courts, or courts in other jurisdictions, can review whether the offence qualifies under updated laws or treaty terms before allowing extradition.
Suppose online defamation was previously not listed as an extraditable offence under an old treaty between Country A and India. However, due to a rise in digital harassment cases, both countries amend their treaty to include cyber defamation.
The updated treaty includes online defamation as an extraditable offence.
A person accused of the crime in Country A flees to India.
Country A submits a formal extradition request post-treaty amendment.
Indian authorities, now recognizing the crime as extraditable, forward the case to an Extradition Magistrate.
The court assesses if the amended treaty applies to the case (based on when the crime was committed).
If allowed under law, the extradition process proceeds accordingly.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about public international law. Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
