Extradition

• Author: International Law Group

Since a judge in Tijuana, Mexico had issued a warrant for his arrest in 1991 for homicide, robbery, and other crimes that allegedly occurred in 1989, U.S. authorities found and arrested Ramiro Cornejo-Barreto in 1996. Mexico then formally requested the extradition of Cornejo-Barreto under the U.S.-Mexico Extradition Treaty (31 U.S.T. 5059; T.I.A.S 9656).

The U.S. is a party to the U. N. Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (G.A. Res. 39/46, 39 U.N. GAOR Supp. No. 51 at 197, U.N. Doc. A/RES/39/708 (1984) which entered into force for the U.S. on November 20, 1994 ("the Torture Convention"). Mexico is also a party to this Convention.

Cornejo-Barreto, who is a permanent U.S. resident, filed a petition for habeas corpus, alleging that police would again torture him in Mexico if the U.S. extradited him. He expressly referred to Article 3 of the Torture Convention which prohibits countries from surrendering individuals ("refoulement") who will face torture in the requesting country. At the 1997 hearing before a magistrate judge, Cornejo-Barreto provided evidence that the State Police in Tijuana had tortured him in 1989 by means of electric shocks and repeated beatings.

The Magistrate issued an extradition certificate and an order of commitment, noting that the police are likely to torture petitioner again upon his surrender to Mexico. Nevertheless, the district court denied habeas corpus, and this appeal ensued. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's denial of habeas corpus, but directs that its decision is without prejudice to the filing of a new petition in case the Secretary of State actually decides to surrender Cornejo-Barreto. Under the "rule of non-inquiry," extradition courts usually do not...