Quick Links: Thailand Law Seminars and Conference | Thai Law Forum Past Issues | About Thailand Law Forum | Advertising Guidelines | Publishing Guidelines

Feature Articles :

Fringe Medical
  Practices in Thailand



Analysis: Thailand’s
  Condominium Bubble



Neither Free nor Fair -
  Burma’s Sham Elections



US Immigration and
  Thai Sex Workers



Legal Rights of
  Transgenders and their
  Partners in Thailand



Renewable Energy
  in Thailand



The Erawan Shrine   Curse and the Red Shirt   Demonstrations



Marriage and Divorce
  in Thailand



Foreign Corrupt
  Practices Act and the
  Thailand Film Festival
Foreign Mafia in
  Thailand
Sex Laws in Thailand:
  Part 1

Thailand News :
4 February 11
   Thai Cabinet to
   Consider Customs Law
   Amendments
4 February 11
   Ministry Vows IPR
   Crackdown
3 February 11
   Thailand to Discuss
   Changes to FTA with
   Australia
29 January 11
   Thai Cabinet to Review
   Thai Nationality Bill
   on Tuesday
26 January 11
   End in Sight for
   Completion of PPP
   Draft Bill
26 January 11
   Charter Bill Passed
   by Thai Parliament
21 January 11
   Enforcement of
   International Corruption
   Laws Strengthens in Asia
18 January 11
   Burma’s Proposed
   Change in Labor Laws
   Welcomed by ILO
15 January 11
   More Charges Levied
   in Case of Thai Farm
   Worker Exploitation in
   the US
6 January 11
   Load of African
   Elephant Tusks
   Confiscated at Thai
   Airport

Thailand Lawyer Blog:
 Thailand Law Forum:
  Latest Updates–Including
  “Buying Gold in Thailand”
  Documentary
 The New Look of
  Thailand Law Forum
 US Refugee Visas: A
  Golden Ticket Finally
  Granted to a Juarez
  Journalist
 US Man Indicted for
  Impersonating a Lawyer:
  A Warning to Fake
  Lawyers in Thailand
 A Visit to the Border:
  Juarez El Paso and
  Murder City
 Will Thaksin Travel to
  the USA to Give
  Testimony: US Visa
  Problems and Extradition
 “Fringe” medical options
  while in Thailand: Still
  Considered “Fringe”?
 Yaba
  (methamphetamine):
  The Thai Worker’s
  Coca Leaf?
 Two International
  Divorce Cases Highlight
  International Prenuptial
  Agreements
 Gay and Lesbian Partner
  Visas in the US: Part and
  Parcel of the Immigration
  Debate?
 The Extradition of
  Viktor Bout: Political
  or Just Wasteful?
 Will Manny Pacquiao
  Save Boxing: Mixed
  Martial Arts versus Boxing
 Nothing Spells LOVE
  More than a Prenuptial
  Agreement: UK’s new
  Prenuptial Agreement
  Case Decision
 Thai Chickens v. UK
  Chickens and Animal
  Rights in Thailand?
 Minnesota Lawyer
  Moonlights as Pimp:
  Prostitution as a New
  Lawyer Specialty?
 

19 May 2009

TREATY
BETWEEN
THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND
AND
THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
ON EXTRADITION

The Kingdom of Thailand and the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “the Contracting Parties”);

Desirous of promoting, on the basis of mutual respect for sovereignty, equality and mutual benefit, the effective cooperation between the two countries in the suppression of crime by concluding a treaty on extradition

Have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE 1
Obligation to Extradite

The Contracting Parties undertake to extradite to each other, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, persons found in the territory of one of the Contracting Parties who are wanted for prosecution, trial or for the imposition or execution of punishment in the territory of the other Party for an extraditable offence.

ARTICLE 2
Extraditable Offences

1. For the purposes of this Treaty, extraditable offences are offences which are punishable under the laws of the Contracting Parties by the penalty of imprisonment or other form of detention for a period of more than one year or by any heavier penalty.
2. Where the request for extradition relates to a person sentenced to imprisonment or other form of detention by a court of the Requesting Party for any extraditable offence, extradition shall be granted only if a period of at least six months in the sentence remains to be served.
3. For the purposes of this Article, in determining whether an offence is an offence against the laws of both Parties, it shall not matter whether the laws of the Contracting Parties place the conduct constituting the offence within the same category of offence or denominate the offence by the same terminology.
4. When extradition has been granted with respect to an extraditable offence, it may also be granted in respect of any other offence specified in the extradition request that meets all other requirements for extradition except for periods of penalty or detention order set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.

ARTICLE 3
Grounds for Mandatory Refusal

Extradition shall not be granted under this Treaty in any of the following circumstances:
(1) the Requested Party considers the offence for which the request for extradition is made by the Requesting Party as a political offence. Reference to a political offence shall not include the taking or attempted taking of the life or an attack on the person of a Head of State or a Read of Government or a member of his or her family;
(2) the Requested Party has well—founded reasons to suppose that the request for extradition made by the Requesting Party aims to institute criminal proceedings against or execute punishment upon the person sought on account of race, religion, nationality or political opinion of that person, or that the position of the person sought in judicial proceedings will be prejudiced for any of the reasons mentioned above;
(3) the offence for which the request for extradition is made is exclusively an offence under military law of the Requesting Party and does not constitute an offence under criminal law of that Contracting Party;
(4) the prosecution or the execution or Punishment for the offence for which extradition has been sought has become barred by reason prescribed under the law of either Contracting Party including a law relating to lapse of time;
(5) the Requested Party has passed judgment upon the person sought in respect of the same offence, before the request for extradition is made.

ARTICLE 4
Grounds for Discretionary Refusal

Extradition may be refused under this Treaty in any of the following circumstances:
(1) the Requested Party in accordance with its law has jurisdiction over the offence for which the request for extradition is made and shall institute proceedings against the person sought;
(2) in exceptional cases, the Requested Party while also taking into account the seriousness of the offence and the interests of the Requesting Party deems that, because of the personal circumstances of the person sought, the extradition would be incompatible with humanitarian consideration;
(3) the Requested Party is in the process of proceeding against the person sought in respect of the sane offence.

Next Page  [1]  [2] [3] [4]  [5] [6] [7]

 
© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)