Abandoning the Rule of Non-Inquiry in International Extradition

Authors

David B. Sullivan

Abstract

Under the rule of non-inquiry, a United States court is barred from denying extradition of an accused criminal, even when it is clear that the accused will be the victim of torture or cruel and inhumane treatment in the requesting country. This Note argues that the rule of non-inquiry should be replaced by a rule more.sensitive to humanitarian concerns. The Note begins by describing the international extradition process and the origins of the rule of non-inquiry. Next, it sets forth the dicta of Gallina v. Fraser, which proposed an exception to the rule of noninquiry. The Note suggests that an extradition request should be denied when the accused provides evidence of treatment in the requesting country which is antipathetic to a court's sense of decency. Finally, the Note analyzes the arguments supporting this exception to the rule of non-inquiry and concludes that the exception should be adopted in order to protect the accused criminal.

Recommended Citation

David B. Sullivan, Abandoning the Rule of Non-Inquiry in International Extradition, 15 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 111 (1991).
Available at: https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_international_comparative_law_review/vol15/iss1/5