Article 3 of the Convention states:
"If the offense was committed outside the territorial jurisdiction of the requesting party, the duty of extradition does not apply unless the laws of the requested party prescribe a penalty for the same offense committed in similar circumstances."
Thus, Israel and the United States sought to expand the range of situations in which extradition proceedings of offenders from the territory of one to the other could be opened even in cases where the offense of extradition was committed outside the borders of the requesting State, provided that if the requested State had been in the shoes of the requesting State, its penal laws would also apply to the act.
When we remember what was said about the rules that outline the application of the penal law in the American system, the roots of the difference between the treaty between Israel and the United States and the other conventions mentioned become clear. The extradition relationship between the United States and Israel is weakened by the position that it is possible and appropriate to extend the application of criminal law beyond the geographical boundaries of the requesting state in those cases in which there is a clear connection between it and the act of the offense.
Reciprocity in the Extradition Relationship
- The issue of extradition is inextricably linked to the idea of reciprocity, according to which where State A has agreed, under the appropriate circumstances, to extradite to State B a person whom the latter wishes to prosecute, then the chances increase that once the situation is reversed, State B will also agree to carry out such extradition, even though it is not legally obligated to do so (The Case Paschowitz [14], p. 452). The State in question is that when the time comes, it will not be deprived of the possibility of applying its penal laws to offenses for which the sense of justice and common sense require that it prosecute it while applying its law and its basic principles, including its case that a person who has fled from the terror of its laws is returned to its territory for the purpose of bringing him to justice. Stay tunedBassiouni
and-Wise:
“Each state has an interest in getting back fugitives from its own law who flee to a foreign country. But to secure their return on a regular basis, a state is likely to have to agree to extradite in its own turn. This is the main motive for concluding extradition treaties” (Bassiouni and Wise supra [141], at p. 37).