Comments on: Schreiber challenges Canada-Germany extradition treaty http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/ Jack's Newswatch - You can fool some of the bears all of the time, and all of the bears some of the time, but you can not fool all of the bears all of the time — Jack's Newswatch Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:07:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: beentheredonethat http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/#comment-1659 beentheredonethat Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:56:22 +0000 http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/?p=2004#comment-1659 Any country can deport any non citizen it wishes.   Without an extradition treaty a country can refuse to hand somebody over to another country, but in this case even if such a treaty doesn't exist Canada has absolutely no reason to refuse to do so.   His lawyer is blowing smoke out of his keister.  All Canada needs to do is inform German authorities what day will be trash collection day and they will send over the garbage collectors to pick him up.   Bye bye. Any country can deport any non citizen it wishes.   Without an extradition treaty a country can refuse to hand somebody over to another country, but in this case even if such a treaty doesn’t exist Canada has absolutely no reason to refuse to do so.   His lawyer is blowing smoke out of his keister.  All Canada needs to do is inform German authorities what day will be trash collection day and they will send over the garbage collectors to pick him up.   Bye bye.

]]> By: Jean http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/#comment-1658 Jean Mon, 06 Jul 2009 06:14:03 +0000 http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/?p=2004#comment-1658 With a treaty a country can demand the extradition of one of it's citizens or someone who committed a crime in their country and the country where the person is actually living or hiding has to respect the treaty and deport the person. I think that without a treaty a country although not obliged to accede to an extradition demand still has the power to extradite anyone it wants to extradite if the country in question sees this person as an undesirable. I could be wrong but the difference is that in one case there is a treaty to respect and in the other it's " optional ". Anyway if I was a lawyer trying to get this guy out of the country this would be one argument I would use assuming that it makes sense in law. With a treaty a country can demand the extradition of one of it’s citizens or someone who committed a crime in their country and the country where the person is actually living or hiding has to respect the treaty and deport the person.

I think that without a treaty a country although not obliged to accede to an extradition demand still has the power to extradite anyone it wants to extradite if the country in question sees this person as an undesirable.

I could be wrong but the difference is that in one case there is a treaty to respect and in the other it’s ” optional “.

Anyway if I was a lawyer trying to get this guy out of the country this would be one argument I would use assuming that it makes sense in law.

]]> By: Mac http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/#comment-1657 Mac Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:05:53 +0000 http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/?p=2004#comment-1657 Well played, you rotten old scoundrel. He doesn't have the "right" to demand a "paper trail" and it's a pretty tenuous straw to cling to but I hope the bureaucrats have a copy of the appropriate treaty ready... Well played, you rotten old scoundrel.

He doesn’t have the “right” to demand a “paper trail” and it’s a pretty tenuous straw to cling to but I hope the bureaucrats have a copy of the appropriate treaty ready…

]]> By: MaryT http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/#comment-1656 MaryT Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:06:32 +0000 http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/?p=2004#comment-1656 Put him on a plane, and as mentioned above, improve the law.  If, after 10 or more years it is decided he should never have been put on that plane, then bring him back to Canada. After he signs all kinds of agreements to never sue, carry on business in this country, or ever seeing another liberal current or former mp or office holder. Put him on a plane, and as mentioned above, improve the law.  If, after 10 or more years it is decided he should never have been put on that plane, then bring him back to Canada. After he signs all kinds of agreements to never sue, carry on business in this country, or ever seeing another liberal current or former mp or office holder.

]]> By: mike http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2009/07/05/schreiber-challenges-canada-germany-extradition-treaty/#comment-1655 mike Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:55:58 +0000 http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/?p=2004#comment-1655 Just put the man on a plane to Germany and get him out of here.   Then reform the laws that allow refugee and extradition treaties to drag out for years even decades, usually with the public funding the legal expenses of the one(s) we are trying to extradite. We need a  "Supreme Refugee/ Extradition Court" which would be the final level of appeal, and sufficiently large to handle the thousands of cases it would be called to hear.  That would set sufficient case law in a short period of time to eventually put itself out of work. That would make too much sense and the lawyer industry which has infiltrated Parliament would prevent it from ever happening.  Probably some sort of Charter issue. mid island mike Just put the man on a plane to Germany and get him out of here.   Then reform the laws that allow refugee and extradition treaties to drag out for years even decades, usually with the public funding the legal expenses of the one(s) we are trying to extradite.

We need a  “Supreme Refugee/ Extradition Court” which would be the final level of appeal, and sufficiently large to handle the thousands of cases it would be called to hear.  That would set sufficient case law in a short period of time to eventually put itself out of work.

That would make too much sense and the lawyer industry which has infiltrated Parliament would prevent it from ever happening.  Probably some sort of Charter issue.

mid island mike

]]>