Therefore, in the criminal sphere, we should not speak of a "rule of decision", but rather of a "rule of priority". This rule is a stop on the way. It is not a final stop. As I mentioned, a judicial forum that is required to decide on the question of extradition needs more than a decision. Thus, for example, where it is found that in light of the rule of priority that has been adopted - whatever its content - it is lawful to give preference to the application of a foreign legal system, the court will still be required to examine whether the defendant will be entitled to a just trial in the foreign country, and alternatively whether the court of that country is likely to provide a "rescue" for the defendant who rises to the point of failing to bring him to justice. The decision will be made on the basis of all the relevant considerations. It is possible that in the end, a legal system will be preferred that does not meet the priority rule, but that fulfills most of the other rationales that the legal system seeks to take into account.
I have discussed these rationales and will continue to discuss below. At this stage, I would like to examine what is the rule of priority in our extradition laws, and in turn we must return to the first concepts in criminal law.
- "The criminal norm is enacted, first and foremost, for the purpose of ensuring the proper functioning of society within its political borders, with all the values on which its existence and development depend in accordance with the perceptions of the political power that guides it. Therefore, the territorial connection of the offense to the state is of the first order." Feller Fundamentals of Penal Law [127], p. 245). Feller recognizes the hierarchy between the various applicability connections. According to him:
"These connections have a hierarchy of values between them, according to the specific weight of the state's interest inherent in each of them. After all, it is not in the interest of the state that requires the application of its penal laws with respect to any offense committed within the territory of the State, as is the interest in applying its laws to any offense, indiscriminately, committed outside the territory of the State. As for foreign offenses: it is not in the interest to apply the law of the state because of an offense that endangers its security, as it is in the interest to punish an offense - any - committed there by a citizen of the state..."
(Feller, "Criminal Jurisdiction" [130], at p. 594).