educative or expressive uses of the criminal law are not diluted by the recurrent spectacle of offenders managing to avoid trial by fleeing to a foreign sanctuary. It serves to close one kind of potential bolt hole” (M.C. Bassiouni, E.M. Wise Aut Dedere Aut Judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law [141], at p. 26).
Fleeing from the fear of the law, it should be emphasized, is a complex concept. It should not be viewed narrowly. It embodies not only the question of the jurisdiction of a state, but also the ability to convict and punish those who have sinned as required (R. v. Godfrey [1922] [112]). I do not see the need to make an exhaustive characterization of the concept of escape from the law. For our purposes, it is sufficient to say that where the body of evidence that can be formulated in the requested country is precarious, since the bulk of it is abroad, or there are real difficulties in bringing witnesses, it is possible that this will help the person to escape - de facto - from the law even if he has been tried in that country. This is illustrated by the words of President Barak in the Sheinbein case:
"...Our laws of evidence, which do not allow, as a rule, hearsay testimony, and are based on the right to cross-examination [burdensome - A.A.L.]... most about the trial in Israel of a defendant in whose case the entire evidentiary system is located outside of Israel. It is no coincidence that the common law countries - to which the State of Israel is close when it comes to criminal proceedings - do not judge their citizens who have committed offenses outside of them, but rather extradite them. Their laws of evidence require this result" (ibid., at p. 640; See also the Feinberg case [8], at pp. 62-63).
- The possibility that the State of Israel would provide, in one sense or another, a refuge for criminals who depend on its legal system as if it were "... Holding the horns of the altar" - In the words of MK Hanan Porat in the Knesset plenum debate on the 5759 amendment to the Extradition Law (D.K. 183 (5759) 4212 of April 19, 1999) - it carries with it severe consequences. First, this can harm the internal effort-My country to fight crime. Second, This is liable to endanger public safety and security in Israel: "The state will cause serious harm to itself if it allows international criminals to reside here safely" - Words Acting President Landau In Parashat Peschowitz [14], p. 456. ThirdThis is damaging to Israel's image in the eyes of the nations of the world as not doing enough to combat crime (see: Parashat Paschowitz [14], Name And Parashat Sheinbein [44], p. 641). It's nice to tap here from my desert Judge Matza:
"Needless to say, a state's refusal to extradite its citizens - and even to prosecute them by necessity - raises suspicions that it is an uncivilized state that provides, God forbid, a shelter for criminals. In this way, not only its image in the eyes of other countries is harmed, but also - which is no less worrying - its image in its own eyes" ( The Hash case [39], at p. 498).