MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-08-22 | Legal decision | The French Ministry of Justice provided its position that it considers Peterson a French national... | France | View |
| 2007-08-22 | N/A | French Ministry of Justice denies extradition of Peterson. | France | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001282.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing, analyzes the legal uncertainty surrounding the timing of nationality assessment for a defendant's extradition between the United States and France. It contrasts the government's position that nationality is determined at the time of the offense with the defendant's expert view that it's at the time of the extradition request. The document highlights that conflicting interpretations of the U.S.-France Extradition Treaty and French law create ambiguity that could frustrate or bar the extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00001253.jpg
This document is a formal letter from the French Ministry of Justice to the U.S. Department of Justice, dated March 9, 2021. It clarifies French legal provisions (Articles 696 et sq., 696-2, and 694-4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) regarding the removal of individuals. The letter emphasizes that removal is not granted for individuals who possess French citizenship at the time of the offense, making their French nationality an "insuperable obstacle" to removal.
DOJ-OGR-00002202.jpg
This letter from the French Ministry of Justice, dated December 11, 2020, is addressed to the U.S. Department of Justice via its Liaison Magistrate in Paris. It formally explains that French law absolutely prohibits the extradition of any individual who was a French national at the time an alleged crime was committed. The letter contrasts this with the practices of Anglo-Saxon countries like the U.S. and clarifies that when extradition is denied on these grounds, French courts are empowered to prosecute the individual under the principle of 'aut tradere, aut judicar' (either extradite or prosecute).
DOJ-OGR-00002202(1).jpg
This letter, dated December 11, 2020, is from the French Ministry of Justice to the U.S. Department of Justice. It clarifies that French law, specifically Article 696-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, absolutely prohibits the extradition of any individual who was a French national at the time an alleged crime was committed. The letter contrasts this with the legal practices of Anglo-Saxon countries like the United States, which may extradite their own nationals.
DOJ-OGR-00002182.jpg
This legal document argues that a defendant's supposed waiver of extradition rights to the United Kingdom is legally unenforceable. It supports this claim by referencing France's strict policy against extraditing its own citizens to the U.S. and by citing the UK's Extradition Act of 2003, which requires a judge to evaluate any such waiver in person with the defendant represented by counsel, rendering anticipatory waivers meaningless.
DOJ-OGR-00002182(1).jpg
This page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) argues against the defendant's bail release by highlighting the risk of non-extradition. The Government asserts that France does not extradite its citizens (citing the 'Peterson' case) and that any anticipatory waiver of extradition to the UK provided by the defendant is unenforceable under the UK Extradition Act of 2003.
DOJ-OGR-00020101.jpg
This letter from the French Ministry of Justice, dated December 11, 2020, is addressed to the U.S. Department of Justice. It explains that French law strictly prohibits the extradition of individuals who were French nationals at the time of the alleged crime, including those with dual nationality. The letter contrasts this with the legal systems of Anglo-Saxon countries like the United States and states that when France refuses extradition on grounds of nationality, it applies the principle of 'aut tradere, aut judicar' (either extradite or prosecute).
DOJ-OGR-00020081.jpg
This document is page 18 of a government filing (Document 102) from June 18, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The text argues against bail by highlighting flight risks, specifically noting that France does not extradite its own citizens (citing the 'Peterson' case) and arguing that any 'anticipatory waiver' of extradition the defendant might sign regarding the United Kingdom is legally unenforceable under UK law (referencing the Extradition Act of 2003 and U.S. v. Stanton). The prosecution asserts that such waivers are meaningless until a defendant is physically present before a British judge.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity