Colonel Colt wrote:
> "Palindrome" wrote in message
> news:ZVfVj.241310$i_6.130753@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> Colonel Colt wrote:
>>> "Palindrome" wrote in message
>>> news:ZgdVj.176196$XH2.154190@fe03.news.easynews.com...
>>>> If you go abroad and break laws in a foreign country, you should expect
>>>> to suffer the consequences - whether they be imposed via that country's
>>>> legal system or your own.
>>>>
>>> Rubbish. If you get caught in the country where you committed the
>>> offence then of course you may be punished for it there. But not
>>> necessarily if you return here. In many muslim countries, it is a
>>> criminal offence for a man to have . with a man. Should a man that
>>> committed that offence but who managed to escape to the UK, be prosecuted
>>> for it in a British court, or extradicted back to the muslim country?
>>>
>>>
>> "If you have that little respect for their laws - then don't go there. Or
>> go there with a Diplomatic Immunity and/or an army and/or as part of an
>> emergency relief effort under the auspices of an organisation that has
>> demanded that its staff will not be subject to local laws."
>>
> Do please stop evading the question. This is not question about the
> advisibleness of putting yourself in that position in the first place; the
> question is whether the British legal system should act as a proxy to
> enforce punishments against actions which are not offences in our legal
> system.
>
>> Yep, provided that the individual will get a fair trial, does not impose
>> cruel and inhuman punishments, etc then , ship them back.
>>
> Why should our legal system expend any time and money on extraditing someone
> for something that is not an offence in the UK?
>
>
>
Because this would be a *reciprocal* arrangement and their nationals
would not be able to come here, commit offences here and return home
without risk of trial or punishment.
--
Sue
|