During the course of a piece of research (I’m currently researching, in unrelated projects, international legal mechanisms, and architectural follies) one line of enquiry led me to look at the forthcoming retrial of US citizen, Amanda Knox, in Italy.
As I read up on the case, I was surprised to see speculation, on CNNs website, that, despite there being a full extradition treaty between Italy and the US, it was likely that the US Government will not extradite Ms Knox to Rome.
What the?
Despite having a full extradition treaty, bound by international law?
Refuse to hand over, to another sovereign nation, a suspect in a crime?
How?
What?
So I read on and was amazed to discover that the US Government has a track record of not handing over US citizens suspected of carrying out criminal offences, committed in Italy, to the Italian government.
Track record?
In 1998, the pilot of an American fighter jet flew low through restricted Italian airspace, and his aircraft clipped a ski lift cable, sending a gondola of 20 passengers to their deaths in the Italian Dolomite mountain range.
Twenty people dead.
Italy requested the aircrew be extradited, to Rome, to try them for multiple manslaughter.
The US refused, and tried the aircrew in a US military tribunal instead.
Guess what the verdict of the US military tribunal was?
The aircrew were found not guilty.
And then, just last year, Italy’s high court upheld the conviction of 22 CIA agents (who had fled from Italy back to the US), and a US Air Force colonel in conjunction with the (illegal) extraordinary rendition of Egyptian cleric Abu Omar from a street in Milan.
Again, the US refused to comply with the extradition order.
So, the next time the US Government requests the extradition of anyone (and I’m thinking, particularly, of the case of hacker Gary McKinnon), we need to feel very comfortable about saying ‘no’.