The potential tension between a state’s need to protect its citizens from national security risks and to respect fundamental human rights is illustrated by current controversies concerning the use of diplomatic assurances in the context of extradition. The need to respect inviolable human rights brings into play the use of assurances in extradition matters, especially if the right to life and prohibition of torture are concerned.
Inductive and deductive methods are used to systematise legal cases which contain human rights violations in extradition proceedings and hold a direct relationship with diplomatic assurances. The analytical method is applied to obtain a clearer picture about violations of human rights in the extradition process.
Diplomatic assurances are given by the requesting states for the purpose of supporting the extradition request and assuring that criminal offenders will not be subjected to ill-treatment or violations of other human rights guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights.
Research Limitations / Implications:
In practice, it has been proven that diplomatic assurances are highly problematic because international law does not generally outlaw the use of such assurances, but establishes legal requirements concerning the use of such assurances in the extradition context.
The article reflects the use of diplomatic assurances in extradition cases, an area that has received greater attention in past years because many states have been found responsible for human rights violations, but at the same time many suspects have managed to avoid extradition because judicial authorities have denied extradition due to assurances not being given.Keywords: diplomatic assurances, extradition, torture, right to life, violation of human rightsPublished in DKUM: 15.04.2020; Views: 299; Downloads: 21 Full text (747,68 KB)This document has many files! More...