quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Until the evidence is given to the Russian side, then we'll be talking. So far they're holding it like its some sort of prized trophy. Thats still not going to get an extradition. I've lived under communism when I was really really young and we all know about these so-called mock-shows. Scotland Yard can make all the claims they want, but if they want an extradition of Lugovoi, they need to present copy of this evidence to Russia. And then subsequent international / Constitutional hurdles ... A statement is not the same as presenting evidence. All British people right now are in the same mental state, a convinced view that Lugovoi is guilty and thats enough for extradition ... but thats not the norms of international law. Ask Interpol, for example, what it takes for extradition: FIRST THING: SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PRESENTED. And so on ....

Do you know that the Russians have not been presented with the evidence?

And if I agree with you that the evidence is flimsy, then what's the problem in having Luovoi in court? If the evidence is as bad as you say it is (after all, you've seen the evidence right?) then he won't get convicted will he?

And to compare the USSR with the UK is ludicrous - the British courts are completely independent of the government, so it is not possible to have a "mock trial" where the verdict has already been decided (unlike in Russia today, according to the EU and UN, which is why the UK refuse to let him be tried there, because the verdict will have already been decided by the Russian government who want to protect Lugovoi)

By the way, a politician on Russia's constitutional legislation committee says Russia could extradite Lugovoi according to the European Convention

quote:

A lawmaker in Russia's upper house of parliament, meanwhile, said he doubted that Russian law prevented such extraditions, according to The Associated Press. Speaking on Ekho Moskvy radio, Yuri Sharandin, chairman of the Federation Council's constitutional legislation committee, said the European convention allowed for such extraditions, but also gives the country receiving the request the right to refuse.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europ...iref=newssearch

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Do you know that the Russians have not been presented with the evidence? And if I agree with you that the evidence is flimsy, then what's the problem in having Luovoi in court? If the evidence is as bad as you say it is (after all, you've seen the evidence right?) then he won't get convicted will he? And to compare the USSR with the UK is ludicrous - the British courts are completely independent of the government, so it is not possible to have a "mock trial" where the verdict has already been decided (unlike in Russia today, according to the EU and UN, which is why the UK refuse to let him be tried there, because the verdict will have already been decided by the Russian government who want to protect Lugovoi)

I had nothing against this UK's bid for extradition, originally. But Russian side hasn;t seen the evidence ... the British themselves in your article said they've JUST finally come up with something, and pressed for extradition. Russian Constitution protects Lugovoi, not the Russian government. It is Russian government's obligation to follow the Constitution, so you cant blame them for not sending Lugovoi out immediately. This process is not going to take a day, or a week, or even a month. A month didnt pass and British have already retaliated! And they they expect Russia is just going to shove the tail between its arse and comply? Come on, man, think ...

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I had nothing against this UK's bid for extradition, originally. But Russian side hasn;t seen the evidence ... the British themselves in your article said they've JUST finally come up with something, and pressed for extradition. Russian Constitution protects Lugovoi, not the Russian government. It is Russian government's obligation to follow the Constitution, so you cant blame them for not sending Lugovoi out immediately. This process is not going to take a day, or a week, or even a month. A month didnt pass and British have already retaliated! And they they expect Russia is just going to shove the tail between its arse and comply? Come on, man, think ...

I'm not actually sure that the requesting party is even required to present any evidence to the country where the wanted man is currently resided in, just documentary evidence that an arrest warrant has been issued by the relevant authorities in the requesting country and details of the person they want extradited

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley I'm not actually sure that the requesting party is even required to present any evidence to the country where the wanted man is currently resided in, just documentary evidence that an arrest warrant has been issued by the relevant authorities in the requesting country and details of the person they want extradited

They can extradite anyone the hell they want then. So thats why there's clauses in a lot of countries' constitutions to protect their citizens against these intrusions. Since the British have the strong evidence, it wouldn't be that hard for them to present it to the Russian authorities now, would it be?

To me it seems like UK knew in advance that Russia couldn't extradite Lugovoi, so they went on a campaign to make Russia look like an evil country. Its pretty dam obvious when reading Russian Constitution that this was coming, but British disregard the law. Plus the retaliations ...

EDIT:

George, just to give you an idea that its not that easy to extradite a person, even UK has had problems with that:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4392194.stm

Delays prevent terror extradition

The Home Office had three years to process the extradition papers.
An alleged al-Qaeda terrorist held in the UK and wanted in Italy will not be extradited because the Home Office did not process the request in time.
Home Office officials failed to meet the three-year extradition deadline for asylum-seeker Farj Hassan Faraj, 24, who was arrested in May 2002.

The Libyan stands accused of being one of the key figures in an Islamic terror gang and a follower of Osama bin Laden.

"Every single extradition case has its own complexities. "

Home Office spokesman

Did the Italians kick out British diplomats?
And why so mant asylum seekers in UK have this history of crime? Is it because its easier to actually escape from prosecution there? If you think Russia is the one who harbours criminals and refuses to extradite them, think twice.
-----------------------------------

We already covered all the points, so maybe we should lay this thread to rest untill British will finally present their strong evidence to the public and/or the Russian authorities.

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

Last edited by Magnetonium on Jul-20-2007 at 00:57

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium We already covered all the points, so maybe we should lay this thread to rest untill British will finally present their strong evidence to the public and/or the Russian authorities.

Like I said, I don't think they need to hand over any evidence, just the arrest warrant...