India: Analysing Extradition In The US In Light Of The Case Study Of Edward Snowden

INTRODUCTION – Case Study of Edward Snowden

Edward Snowden's case is a historic case involving political offence that will very certainly go down in the history books as among the most significant whistleblower cases. In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former CIA systems administrator and computer engineer, disclosed sensitive government intelligence to the media, confirming the existence of government surveillance programmes. According to a few legal academics and the US government, his actions were in violation of the 1917 Espionage Act, which defined treason as the revelation of government secrets. Although he had broken the law, Snowden claimed that he had an obligation to act. He rationalized his "whistleblowing" by asserting that it was his job to tell the public of actions conducted in their name and against them. Snowden flew from Hong Kong to Moscow, and after being in transit for 39 days, the federal migration service granted him asylum for one year in Russia. In the present case, the United States Government wanted Russia to extradite Snowden back to the United States so that he could be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. Stephen Vladeck, a legal scholar stated that it was impossible to ascertain at the time whether Snowden would be extradited back to the US. He claims that much of what has complicated the US stance in the Snowden case is enmity and resentment from nations like as China and Russia, which seem to be angry of the US surveillance methods that Snowden has revealed. Also, it depends on diplomatic and foreign policy concerns that are hard to quantify because extradition is a political—rather than a legal—process, especially when extraditing someone from a nation with which an extradition treaty is absent, such as Russia.¹ As of 2020, Edward Snowden was granted permanent Residence in Russia and could never be extradited despite all the US government's efforts.

ANALYSING EXTRADITION IN THE US

Since Snowden's case has been addressed, it is only right to understand how the Extradition process works in the US. The procedure usually starts with a foreign country submitting treaty-required documentation to the US State Department, which commonly includes information on the individual pursued, the purported charges, prosecution documents, warrants issued, and proof. Foreign authorities may demand a preliminary arrest and detention until they gather the necessary information if they feel there is a flight risk. The secretary of state then determines whether to forward the application to the Justice Department, which investigates the matter for treaty compliance, gets a warrant of arrest, and apprehends the offender, who is then brought in front of a federal judge or magistrate. The court next assesses if there are probable grounds to think the accused committed a crime covered by the treaty in question. If indeed the court finds reasonable grounds, it approves the extradition and sends that case back to the secretary of state, who would have the ultimate word. Rather than determining whether the facts charged form a crime in the prosecuting nation, this certification method evaluates whether the facts claimed establish a crime in the prosecuting nation. The above-mentioned procedure is applicable when extraditions happen from the US. Now, extraditions to the US will be discussed. A state or federal prosecutor contacts the appropriate law enforcement agency to discover more about the offence and determine if the considerable expenses of extradition are justified. (Translation expenses are covered by the asking state or federal attorney's office.) Prosecutors subsequently draft an application for submission to the Justice Department, that evaluates it for legality. Justice submits this to the Department Of state if it has been authorized. The State Department submits the request to the appropriate US embassy, which passes it to the authorities in the nation of asylum after it has been approved. The procedure thereafter differs each nation, although it often follows a similar route to that of the United States. Many nations allow suspects to fight or challenge extradition. The US Marshals Service will most commonly transport the fugitive to the United States after receiving consent from the place of sanctuary. The length of time it takes to extradite someone from the United States varies greatly between case to case, however on an average, it takes upwards of a year from request to surrendering. Several cases have lasted more than a decade to resolve, while others are concluded without a fugitive being apprehended. We end the discussion of the American extradition laws with a successful case of extradition of "El-Chapo", or Joaquin Guzman Loera. Guzman, the former boss of the Sinaloa Cartel, was extradited to the United States in 2017 to face several drug-related indictments. Leading up to his transfer, Guzman escaped from Mexico's maximum-security institutions twice, raising questions about the country's system of justice. After a three-month trial that gave extensive insight into the inner workings of one of the most profitable international crime syndicates in history, he was sentenced in a New York federal district court in February 2019.²

Footnotes

1. Jonathan Masters, 'Extraditing Edward Snowden' (Council on Foreign Relations, 2022) (https://www.cfr.org/interview/extraditing-edward-snowden) accessed 12 April 2022.

2. Jonathan Masters, 'What Is Extradition?' (Council on Foreign Relations, 2022) (https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-extradition) accessed 12 April 2022.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.