Such an approach is also applied in civil law. It is the accepted approach to examining the appropriateness of the forum sitting in the trial (see: Civil Appeals Authority 4716/93 Arab Society for Insurance Nablus v. Zarikat [50], at p. 269; Authority of Civil Appeal 851/99 Bankruptcy Trustees of ABC Containerline N.V. v. Depypere [51], at p. 813). Admittedly, she was criticized. It was argued that it is liable to harm legal certainty and even serve as a manipulative instrument in the hands of the courts (see: Craney in his book [126], at p. 53 and the Yinon case [28], at p. 375). However, these arguments have no basis when we are dealing with a criminal trial. Indeed, as I noted above, the principle of legal certainty is one of the foundations of the penal law. However, it only means that a person will not be exposed to the imposition of criminal liability when he is unable to know about the criminal prohibition and its nature (Criminal Appeal 534/78 Cobilio v. State of Israel [52], at p. The principle is also connected to the right of a defendant to a fair trial and to clarify his guilt on the basis of fair and clear rules of evidence. However, it is not the certainty of a criminal that he will be able to escape punishment if he only manages to carry out his wrongful acts in a place or in a manner that will not allow him to be brought to justice. It is not certain that he will be able to generate his profits in a certain place, but he will not be exposed to the dangers of the system that is practiced in that place. Nor is this the certainty of a person
Let him argue that he is not familiar with the laws of the country in which he chose to commit an offense (see in this regard the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., in United States v. YuILS (1988) [111], at p. 902).
The "centre of gravity" approach as a general preference for extradition questions has also been adopted by Canadian courts. It began with the remarks of the Queen's Bench Judge of the Province of Manitoba, Justice Hanssen, in the case of United States of America v. Swystun [1987] [123]. In the same matter, the court listed all the considerations that must be taken into account in the question of whether to extradite to the United States a Canadian citizen suspected of conspiracy to distribute drugs in the United States. He committed the acts attributed to him only in Canada. The relevant considerations included, inter alia, the place where the influence of the conspiracy was known, the question of which of the competing methods has a stronger interest in prosecuting the defendant, the question of which of the countries to which the law enforcement agency that exposed the affair belongs, the place where the evidentiary center of gravity is located, and more. At the end of the exam, it was determined: