Taiwan Extradition Agreements

Written by

Gen­er­ally speaking, an extra­di­tion treaty requires a country requesting extra­di­tion to prove this: but the pro­posed amend­ments would have allowed the Hong Kong gov­ern­ment to con­sider requests for the extra­di­tion of crim­inal sus­pects from any country, including coun­tries with which it does not have an extra­di­tion con­ven­tion, including main­land China, Taiwan and Macao. The rise and fall of the Hong Kong government‘s extra­di­tion law, which could lead to Hong Kong res­i­dents and vis­i­tors being tried in China, is a story of the best and worst moments. On the one hand, the Hong Kong government‘s deci­sion to sus­pend the leg­isla­tive process has been touted as evi­dence of how a living civil society can, from time to time, bring a semi-​​democratic gov­ern­ment to its all. This is the best time, since reason still pre­dom­i­nates, despite the growing signs of soft author­i­tar­i­anism. On the other hand, the attempt to manip­u­late the existing extra­di­tion law, under which a fire­wall was delib­er­ately set up to pro­tect Hong Kongers from China‘s legal scope on the eve of Hong Kong‘s return to main­land France in 1997, reveals the extent to which the city‘s status under “one country, two sys­tems” is fragile. If such guar­an­tees pro­vided for by law have to be reviewed before the 50-​​year period of guar­an­teed autonomy is even halfway through, it is a deadly pub­licity gift for the gravity of the sit­u­a­tion. But as the “Sup­port Hong Kong Pro­tect Taiwan” appeal shows, Taiwan does not sup­port Hong Kongers without keeping an eye on its own national inter­ests. There is nothing wrong with this real­istic attitude. .

Comments are closed.