Pinochet Extradition Case: Selected Legal Issues (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (16 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
March 3, 2000 |
| Report Number |
RL30117 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
David M. Ackerman, American Law Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
On March 2, 2000, Britain's Home Secretary Jack Straw terminated the unprecedented
proceeding
to extradite General Pinochet of Chile to Spain for trial on alleged human rights violations
committed while he was in power in Chile and allowed him to return home. The reason cited by the
Home Secretary was that several strokes suffered by Pinochet in the fall of 1999 had rendered him
"mentally [in]capable of meaningful participation in a trial."
The proceeding stemmed from two requests for Pinochet's extradition made by Spanish
authorities in mid-October, 1998, when they discovered Pinochet was in England for back surgery
and other purposes. Both requests alleged Pinochet's culpability for numerous human rights
violations committed during his time in power. A trial court initially held him to be absolutely
immune as a former head of state from arrest and extradition. But in a seminal decision on
November 25, 1998, a panel of the Lords of Appeal of the House of Lords held, 3-2, that the
international law of human rights has evolved to the point that it overrides the long-standing doctrine
of immunity. On December 17, 1998, however, that decision was set aside on the grounds one of
the judges in the majority had failed to disclose that he had a continuing association with Amnesty
International, a private organization which had been permitted to intervene in the case.
As a consequence, a differently constituted panel of Law Lords, after twelve days of oral
argument, issued a new decision on March 24, 1999. That decision substantially narrowed the
charges against Pinochet to just a few instances of torture allegedly committed after September 29,
1988, because prior to that time neither England nor Chile had ratified the Torture Convention. But
the court again held that Pinochet possessed no immunity as a former head of state from the charges
of torture. Because its limitation of the charges for which Pinochet might be extradited and its ruling
on immunity constituted a "substantial change in circumstances," however, the court in that decision
invited the Home Secretary to exercise the statutory power he has over extradition requests and to
reconsider whether Spain's extradition request ought to move forward.
The Home Secretary did so; and on April 15, 1999, he concluded that the extradition
proceedings ought to be allowed to continue. On October 8, 1999, a British magistrate ruled that
Spain's extradition request met the standard of dual criminality set forth in the European Convention
on Extradition and England's implementing statute and that, therefore, Pinochet should be extradited
to Spain. In early January 2000, however, the Home Secretary reported that he was "minded" to
terminate the extradition proceeding because of recent deterioration in Pinochet's mental health.
Spain, Belgium, France, Switzerland and several human rights organizations protested. But on
March 2 the Home Secretary issued a statement detailing his reasons and terminated the proceeding.
General Pinochet immediately boarded a Chilean plane and returned to Chile.
This report summarizes these complex and precedent-setting proceedings. It will not be
updated.
