The very long arm of the law

FOR A LEGAL COMMENTATOR, EXTRADITION IS the story that keeps on giving. It’s where politics and the law collide: it’s the clash between international treaties and individual rights. But it doesn’t always lead to justice.

One of the most fascinating stories I covered as a BBC correspondent was Spain’s attempt to have the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet extradited from London, where he had unwisely chosen to do some pre-Christmas shopping in 1998. Extradition was eventually refused by the home secretary Jack Straw — but not before the UK’s most senior judges were forced to reconsider their decision on the case because one of their number had sat while legally disqualified.

“Extradition” means “handing over”. A country is asked to extradite an alleged criminal or convicted fugitive to another country. Because every state has responsibilities towards people within its jurisdiction, the country where the suspect is living must decide whether to grant the extradition request. In a democracy, it’s judges who decide whether a contested extradition should go ahead. But because a sovereign state cannot be forced to send anyone abroad, the decision must ultimately be one for the government concerned.

At one extreme, there are states like Russia that refuse to extradite their own nationals. The two Russian agents accused of using the deadly nerve agent Novichok in an attempt to kill