Deportation and extradition in the context of the death penalty : a legal study on removal from Malta

Abstract

For centuries, the processes of extradition and deportation were largely dominated by states’ interests. However, as the human rights movement turned its attention to these legal mechanisms in recent decades, both have evolved beyond safeguarding states interests to reinforcing the position of the individual. The death penalty is closely related. While many states have abolished the death penalty de facto (in practice) or de jure (in law), others continue to uphold its use. In this context, extradition and deportation become particularly significant when an individual located in an abolitionist state faces removal to a retentionist state, where he or she may be sentenced to death. These cases require careful consideration of the individual’s human rights, particularly the right to life and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This dissertation explores how these issues are addressed in law and in practice, with particular focus on Malta as an abolitionist state. It examines what obligations Malta has under international, regional, and domestic law when asked to remove individuals to states that retain the death penalty. In so doing, it examines key international and regional instruments, human rights case-law, and the use of diplomatic assurances in such cases. The study concludes that while Malta’s extradition law is generally in line with its human rights obligations and its practice tends to reflect these commitments, the same cannot be said for its deportation law and constitutional protections. It argues that legal reform is needed to better align its legal framework with its commitments and stance as an abolitionist state.