(a) Article 3 of the Convention imposes on the parties certain obligations with respect to extradition. That Article provides as follows:
(1) No State party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
(2) For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.
(b) Pursuant to sections 3184 and 3186 of Title 18 of the United States Criminal Code, the Secretary is the U.S. official responsible for determining whether to surrender a fugitive to a foreign country by means of extradition. In order to implement the obligation assumed by the United States pursuant to Article 3 of the Convention, the Department considers the question of whether a person facing extradition from the U.S. “is more likely than not” to be tortured in the State requesting extradition when appropriate in making this determination.
Notes of Decisions
Hedelito Garcia v. Linda Thomas, 683 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2012).
· cites it 6× “The record before us provides no evidence that the Sec- retary has complied with the procedure in Trinidad y Garcia’s case.”
Barapind v. Gov't of the Repub. of India, 844 F.3d 824 (9th Cir. 2016).
· cites it 3× “Barapind argued before the Department that under the Convention, as implemented by the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (“FARRA”), the United States would violate 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b) if it extradited Barapind to India because he would “more likely than not”…”
Aguasvivas v. Pompeo, 984 F.3d 1047 (1st Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b). Aguasvivas, though, does not want to wait to see what the Secretary decides.”
Kulvir Singh Barapind v. Janet Reno, Attorney Gen., 225 F.3d 1100 (9th Cir. 2000).
“3d at 1011 , 1013 (quoting 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 ). Because the FARR Act imposes a “clear standard” against which to measure the Secretary's actions, we concluded that the Secretary’s decisions regarding the extradition of a fugitive who claims that he will be tortured if returned is…”
Ramiro Cornejo-Barreto, AKA Rabbit, AKA Cornhole v. W.H. Seifert, Warden, 218 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2000).
“22 C.F.R. §§ 95.2 — 95.3 (2000). D. Judicial Review of the Secretary’s Decisions The “Review and Construction” section of the FARR Act makes clear Congress’ intention that the agencies — in the extradition context the Department of State — are to have the initial responsibility…”
Ramiro Cornejo-Barreto v. W.H. Siefert, Warden of the Metro. Det. Ctr., 379 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2004).
“‘is more likely than not’ to be tortured in the State requesting extradition,” 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b), and that “[biased on the resulting analysis of relevant information, the Secretary may decide to surrender the fugitive to the requesting State, to deny surrender of the…”
Kapoor v. DeMarco, 132 F.4th 595 (2d Cir. 2025).
“” 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b). They state that “to implement the obligation assumed by the United States pursuant to Article 3 of the Convention, the Department considers the question of whether a person facing extradition from the U.”
Mironescu v. Costner, 480 F.3d 664 (4th Cir. 2007).
“” 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b) (2006). They provide that “to implement the obligation assumed by the United States pursuant to Article 3 of the Convention, the Department considers the question of whether a person facing extradition from the U.”
In Re the Extradition of Mironescu, 296 F. Supp. 2d 632 (M.D.N.C. 2003).
“3d at 1011 , 1013 (quoting 22 C.F.R. §§ 95.2 ). Because the FARR Act imposes a “clear standard” against which to measure the Secretary’s actions, we concluded that the Secretary’s decisions regarding the extradition of a fugitive who claims that he will be tortured if returned…”
Prasoprat v. Benov, 622 F. Supp. 2d 980 (C.D. Cal. 2009).
“official responsible for determining whether to surrender a fugitive to a foreign country by means of extradition[,]" 22 C.F.R. § 95.2 (b); (2) providing that "to implement the obligation assumed by the United States pursuant to Article 3 of the Convention, the Department…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.