Stefano Betti
International judicial cooperation against crime is emerging as one of the casualties of current worldwide geopolitical tensions. Divergences between states, reflected in a wide spectrum of behaviours – from verbal hostility to the suspension of diplomatic relations and resorting to armed conflict – are having a significant impact on extradition and mutual legal assistance (MLA) channels. The significance of this problem is that the success of countries’ efforts in cooperating internationally and mitigating cross-border crime depends greatly on the proper functioning of these modalities.
This issue often remains under the radar of current-affairs coverage, mainly because it tends to be confined within legal proceedings that are either confidential or less likely to attract public attention compared to the commercial and economic impacts of ongoing upheavals. Yet this directly affects states’ ability to confront increasingly invasive forms of transnational organised crime such as human trafficking, environmental crime and different forms of cybercrime. These are often considered a threat to international security.
Criminal-justice treaties in the crosshairsThe status of the Council of Europe (CoE) Criminal Law Convention on Corruption offers a telling example of global tensions spilling over into the criminal-justice domain. The convention was formally denounced by Russia in 2023 in response to its sidelining in the CoE’s Group of States Against Corruption. Tellingly, Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that continued ‘Western discrimination’ may lead to the denunciation of more CoE conventions. This could affect the entire spectrum of European treaties in the fields of MLA, extradition and money laundering, among others.
Another notable example is the decision by Hong Kong in 2020 to suspend the MLA and the extradition agreements that it had concluded with several Western countries in the 1990s and 2000s – including Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States – and to shelve a pending treaty with France. This move came as a retaliatory measure after these states had themselves suspended the same agreements with Hong Kong following the enactment of its controversial National Security Law.
No comments:
Post a Comment