- 15-Oct-2025
- public international law
Extradition involving multiple countries, often referred to as multiple extradition requests, is a complex legal scenario that requires careful consideration of various factors. When an accused person is wanted for prosecution in more than one country, India must navigate international treaties, diplomatic relations, and human rights protections to determine which country will be granted priority for extradition. The process is further complicated by factors such as political offenses, dual criminality, the nature of the offense, and India’s own diplomatic and strategic interests.
India follows both national laws and international conventions to manage extradition requests. The country's approach balances legal obligations with practical considerations, such as the severity of the alleged crime, the status of bilateral extradition treaties, and international cooperation mechanisms like Interpol and Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs).
India has entered into bilateral extradition treaties with several countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, among others. These treaties define the terms under which extradition can occur, including the types of offenses that are extraditable. In the case of multiple requests, treaties may stipulate specific procedures for determining which country has the strongest claim for extradition based on factors like the severity of the offense and the territorial link to the crime.
If the crime occurred in one country but the accused is found in another, the territorial principle often plays a significant role in determining priority.
The dual criminality principle requires that the crime must be illegal in both the requesting country and India.
The type of crime being charged can influence the decision-making process. Some offenses, such as terrorism, corruption, or organized crime, might be given priority due to their high-profile nature or international significance. For example, if one country is requesting extradition based on terrorism-related charges while another is requesting it for a financial fraud case, India may prioritize the terrorism case due to its national security implications.
Political crimes are generally exempt from extradition under international law. India will refuse extradition requests for individuals wanted for political offenses if those offenses are not recognized as crimes by the requesting country (i.e., the crime is seen as politically motivated).
Diplomatic relations and political alliances between India and the requesting countries play a key role in determining which extradition request is honored first. Strategic interests, foreign policy goals, and economic ties may influence the decision. If one of the requesting countries is an important trade partner or an ally in regional security matters, India may give priority to that country’s request, even if the legal case is weaker.
India also considers its relationship with countries in the European Union, Middle East, and Gulf regions. In such cases, multilateral diplomacy becomes important, especially in cases involving extradition to and from non-democratic countries.
If the accused faces the death penalty or the possibility of torture or inhumane treatment in one of the requesting countries, India must consider these human rights aspects before agreeing to extradition. India, like many countries, is committed to protecting human rights, especially under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). As a result, if a country requesting extradition has a poor record of human rights abuses, India may deny the request on humanitarian grounds.
This is particularly relevant if the accused could face capital punishment or an unfair trial.
In the absence of specific extradition treaties, or when multiple countries request the same individual, India often applies the first come, first served principle. This principle means that the first country to request extradition has a priority claim to the accused, assuming all other factors (such as human rights concerns) are favorable.
India also uses mechanisms like Interpol to assist in the investigation and tracking of fugitives who may be wanted by multiple countries. Interpol Red Notices can be issued to alert all member countries of an individual's location, making it easier for countries to cooperate in the apprehension of the accused.
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) allow countries to assist each other in gathering evidence and conducting joint investigations. These treaties are particularly useful when multiple countries have an interest in prosecuting the same individual for the same or related offenses.
In some cases, an individual may face multiple charges in different countries. India has occasionally negotiated sequential extradition—where the accused may be extradited to one country first to face charges, and once that case is concluded, they may be extradited to another country to face additional charges.
Example: If a person is charged with money laundering in one country and terrorism in another, India may allow extradition to the country with the more urgent or severe charge first, before allowing extradition to the other country.
Consider a hypothetical scenario where an individual, X, is accused of financial fraud in India and terrorism in another country, Country A. Additionally, Country B is requesting extradition for drug trafficking charges.
Extradition involving multiple countries is a multifaceted process that requires India to carefully balance legal considerations, human rights protections, diplomatic relations, and the nature of the crime. While India follows its extradition treaties and international obligations, political, legal, and strategic factors also influence decisions about which country's extradition request will take precedence. The involvement of Interpol, MLATs, and human rights assessments ensures that India navigates complex extradition scenarios in a manner consistent with both its legal obligations and international commitments.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about public international law. Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
