DOJ-OGR-00002180.jpg
734 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
734 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on December 18, 2020, argues that an unnamed defendant, who is a French citizen, would be completely protected from extradition to the United States if she were to flee to France. The argument is supported by direct communication from the French Ministry of Justice, which confirmed France's inflexible principle of not extraditing its citizens outside the European Union, and is further bolstered by a legal precedent from the 2013 case, United States v. Cilins.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| unnamed defendant | defendant |
The subject of the legal argument, described as a French citizen who would be protected from extradition if she flees...
|
| Cilins | Defendant in a prior case |
Mentioned in the case citation United States v. Cilins, as an example of someone who could avoid prosecution by reach...
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs (“OIA”) | government agency |
A U.S. government body that contacted the French Ministry of Justice to confirm France's extradition policy.
|
| French Ministry of Justice (“MOJ”) | government agency |
A French government body that confirmed to the U.S. Government that France does not extradite its citizens to the Uni...
|
| European Union | political and economic union |
Mentioned as the geographical limit for France's extradition of its own nationals; France does not extradite its nati...
|
| S.D.N.Y. | court |
Abbreviation for the Southern District of New York, the court where the United States v. Cilins case was heard.
|
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Identified as the country of citizenship for the defendant, which does not extradite its citizens to the United States.
|
|
|
The country seeking extradition and where the legal proceedings are taking place.
|
|
|
Mentioned in a quote from a previous case, indicating that reaching this territory would allow a French citizen to av...
|
Relationships (2)
The document discusses the U.S. Government's efforts to ensure the defendant can be extradited, while arguing that the defendant could flee to France to avoid it.
U.S. Government (OIA)
→
professional (inter-governmental)
→
French Ministry of Justice (MOJ)
The OIA contacted the MOJ to clarify a point of French law regarding extradition, and the MOJ responded with a formal letter.
Key Quotes (2)
"because of these waivers and other factors, it is highly unlikely that she would be able to resist extradition successfully,"Source
— defendant’s own experts
(A conclusion from the defendant's experts, cited in the document to show that even they acknowledge a possibility of avoiding extradition.)
DOJ-OGR-00002180.jpg
Quote #1
"Because France refuses to extradite its citizens, Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil."Source
— S.D.N.Y. Court (in United States v. Cilins)
(A quote from a 2013 court case used as a legal precedent to support the argument that France does not extradite its citizens.)
DOJ-OGR-00002180.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,218 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 100 Filed 12/18/20 Page 19 of 36
the jurisdiction of her choosing (i.e., the one to which she chose to flee). The Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs (“OIA”) is unaware of any country anywhere in the world that would consider an anticipatory extradition waiver binding. Indeed, the defendant’s own experts’ conclusion—that “because of these waivers and other factors, it is highly unlikely that she would be able to resist extradition successfully,” (Mot. at 27)—leaves open the possibility that she could avoid extradition.
Such an outcome is virtually a certainty as to France, a country of which the defendant is a citizen and which does not extradite its citizens to the United States. To confirm this fact, after receiving the Renewed Bail Motion, the Government, through OIA, contacted the French Ministry of Justice (“MOJ”) to clarify whether there is any circumstance under which France would extradite a French citizen to the United States. In response, the MOJ provided the Government with a letter setting forth the relevant law and conclusively stating that France does not extradite its citizens to the United States. That letter in its original French, as well as an English translation of the letter, are attached hereto as Exhibit B. In that letter, the MOJ makes clear that France does not extradite its nationals outside the European Union (regardless of the existence of dual citizenship), including to the United States, and has never derogated from that principle outside the European Union. See Ex. B; see also United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) (“Because France refuses to extradite its citizens, Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil.”).
In other words, even assuming the Government could locate the defendant, if she flees to France, her citizenship in that country will completely bar her extradition. Any purported waiver of extradition executed in the United States would not be enforceable against the defendant in France because French law embodies an inflexible principle that its citizens will not be extradited
16
DOJ-OGR-00002180
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document