Truth In the Extradition: Extradition Treaties as Objective Tools for Assessing Human Rights Conditions

Christopher Li

doi:10.54097/dghsef23

Authors

Christopher Li

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/dghsef23

Keywords:

Extradition Treaty, Human Rights, Legal System.

Abstract

This paper explores the reliability of extradition treaties as objective tools for assessing human rights conditions, using the China-Australia extradition treaty as a case study. Unlike biased statements from government officials, extradition treaties are formal legal agreements, offering a more credible lens for evaluating justice systems. The paper examines Australia's refusal to ratify the 2007 treaty with China, citing concerns about torture, politically motivated charges, and the death penalty. It also highlights some complexities in China's legal system, including the shuanggui practice and high conviction rates, raising questions about procedural fairness. Australia’s decision to resist ratification underscores its commitment to human rights and sets a precedent for other nations in handling diplomatic relations with China.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Verma, Pranshu. “The United States, the European Union and Others Have Imposed Sanctions on China over Xinjiang, and China Has Retaliated.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Mar. 2021, cn.nytimes.com/world/20210323/sanctions-china-uighurs/.

[2] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5.

[3] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5. Ma Kunlong. Short term distributed load forecasting method based on big data. Changsha: Hunan University, 2014.

[4] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5.

[5] “Australian Politicians Banned from China ‘will Not Repent’ for Criticism.” BBC News, BBC, 17 Nov. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50452829.

[6] “Australian Politicians Banned from China ‘will Not Repent’ for Criticism.” BBC News, BBC, 17 Nov. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50452829.

[7] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5.

[8] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5.

[9] “Australian Politicians Banned from China ‘will Not Repent’ for Criticism.” BBC News, BBC, 17 Nov. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50452829.

[10] Committee Against Torture, Fifth periodic report of China UN Doc CAT/C/CHN/5 (17-18 November 2015)

[11] Norton, Simon. “BARRIERS TO COOPERATION WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT: THE CASE OF THE AUSTRALIA—CHINA EXTRADITION TREATY.” Australia—China Law Enforcement Cooperation. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ resrep23112.5

[12] SHI Biao, LI Yu Xia, YU Xhua, YAN Wang. Short-term load forecasting based on modified particle swarm optimizer and fuzzy neural network model. Systems Engineering-Theory and Practice, 2010, 30(1): 158-160.